History of Chennai

[Arasu]

From the above, one can see how rigid the rules are and how severe punishements are meted out for transgressions.

This exemplifies the rigidity of the system and how the system was able to be maintained for such long periods of time. That also explains why caste system is in the blood of every Indian.

it is inconceivable (not to everyone, obviously) that such a system could have been forced on such a huge country of several hundred million people in all the nooks and corners within a period of two centuries by a few thousand foreigners.

The problems for such an assumption are many:

1. Colonialists spent more than a hundred years fighting with other colonizers and local kings to gain control of territory. Even at the end, they only had control of half the country. Therefore, they didn't have control of the whole country to spread a rigid form of caste system in all the nooks and corners of this country. But, what we see is that caste system is prevalent in all parts whether colonialsists had ruled those parts or not. This by itself be sufficient reason for excluding the colonialsts as the masterminds for the caste rigidity.

2. Even if they wanted to spread rigidity, they didn't have the numbers to reach the far flung areas of the country.
To take an example, the missionaries have been trying to convert the masses (especially the downtrodden) for centuries. What success did they attain? 3% of Indian population is Christian? If they have not been able to convert suffering masses to another religion that can provide salvation besides food and shelter, how are they supposed to have spread rigidity into the caste system?

3. Assuming somehow, they were able to make the 'dynamic' and 'fluid' caste system into a 'rigid' one. How could they have achieved it?
- By caste census?
- By Risley's pseudoscientific anthropometric anlaysis of caste system?

Let us not question how but assume those two methodogies have the potential to change the minds of Indians.
How did they reach millions of illiterate Indians in all the unreachable corners of India at dinned into their minds about the rigidity of the caste system? The literacy rate of India was 3% in the 1880s.

Let us even assume, the colonialsists were able to reach and communicate every individual about the caste rigidity. What did they do to make them follow it for the next hundred years? What made these people voluntarily follow the caste system in all its rigid form?

What methods did they adopt to make the Indians who were supposedly intermingling and intermarrying not to do so? (Forget for a minute, intermingling and intermarrying would have eradicated the caste long before the colonialists.)

When someone comes up with such a grand narrative (despite ones avowed disregard and dismissal of grand narratives) that colonialists made the caste system a rigid one, they should also come up with some practical methodology how it was achieved on the ground with some believable evidence or rationale.

[ramvaradan]

Originally Posted by Arasu

While your are trying to denounce grand 'schemes' because grand narratives are out of fashion, but you are coming up with your own grand narratives - that caste rigidity happened in the last two centuries. Not the first time you contradict yourself.

I don't know if you are deluding yourself or trying to delude everybody else.
Here is some (Caste/Varna) rigidity from the time of Manusmriti.

Fusionist

I am in total agreement with Arasu in his view of your arguments.

There is a certain undertone of farce in your arguments. Atheism is also a faith. Its the faith that there is no faith. As farcical as it sounds, its true. They faithfully disbelieve in the metaphysical. Although 'Faith' is often associated to 'acceptance of GOD', I feel its a rather parochial view.


1) You claim 'the interpretations of history is what leads to trouble'. But yours is also a form of interpretation.. that the 'Colonialism bred the caste and was the root cause of its modern form.' In casting such an argument, you are not just 'deconstructing' but also are 'constructing' a theory. Now, there are piles of evidences of casteism and untouchable practices in our literature. Not just mythology. You can take Silapathikaram, or Nalopakyanam, Athichuvadi, Vedas and many more. These were not 'construed' by Brits or mis-interpreted by quack literarians. Its obvious Manu did'nt figment out of thin air, he was codifying the prevalent practice.

2) You claim there is 'no original truth' but still blazing from all the guns to support your argument. You cannot argue in good faith if you don't believe them fully.

3) You say that if a 'certain approach to history causes stress, we need to change course.' Thats not how the history is purported to be utilized or understood. We need to digest the disgusting parts of it too. Some parts of History are meant to be without any closure its like an open-ended mystery novel. But, still there are 'views that are supported' by what actually took place. We don't look to history to teach us the value of justice or fairplay, we study it for lessons to learn or unlearn more on a cause & effect basis. Its almost like looking at the rear-view mirror in our car -- because sometimes space & time really do warp. And we cannot afford any short-term memory.

[Fusionist]

Originally Posted by ramvaradan

There is a certain undertone of farce in your arguments. Atheism is also a faith. Its the faith that there is no faith. As farcical as it sounds, its true. They faithfully disbelieve in the metaphysical. Although 'Faith' is often associated to 'acceptance of GOD', I feel its a rather parochial view.

I am not sure where God came into place in this argument, please educate me.

My criticism was of the Dravidian movement. It was based on the racial theories proposed by Max Muller and Caldwell. It is flawed from inscription.

1) You claim 'the interpretations of history is what leads to trouble'. But yours is also a form of interpretation.. that the 'Colonialism bred the caste and was the root cause of its modern form.' In casting such an argument, you are not just 'deconstructing' but also are 'constructing' a theory. Now, there are piles of evidences of casteism and untouchable practices in our literature. Not just mythology. You can take Silapathikaram, or Nalopakyanam, Athichuvadi, Vedas and many more. These were not 'construed' by Brits or mis-interpreted by quack literarians. Its obvious Manu did'nt figment out of thin air, he was codifying the prevalent practice.

The concept that deconstruction itself is a form of construction, and that post-modernism itself is a form of construction has been proposed several times. It has also been negated several times. There is nothing new to your idea. But thats called trying to be too smart. In semiotic terms it can be seen as 'noise'. A signifier without any significance.

Hence the idea 'what is constructed is what that needs to be deconstructed'. If a particular system is causing stress it means it is not working. I assume we all are of the understanding that caste is an issue today which is why we are discussing the topic first of all. So the need to re-examine the theories that made us look at caste from a particular perspective.

And we all know what was constructed, even today many seem to be miminmg it verywell.

2) You claim there is 'no original truth' but still blazing from all the guns to support your argument. You cannot argue in good faith if you don't believe them fully.

That is because you seem lost. This is where we need to distinguish the difference between your understanding of the argument and mine.

My study is about the interpreters/writers.

Your study is still about the content of the book.

By doing so you are borrowing the EYE of the writer, inshort merging and seeing from HIS perspective. This is pure structuralism. This way the signifier become the signified. It dwells on the concept of an underlying truth that can be deciphered with deep analysis.

Me, I am looking AT the interpreter and not the content, this way I am able to distinguish the difference between signifiers and the signified, by having a third point of view. Hence my elaborate effort to understand the nature of the signifiers.

Your analogy that caste existed because writers wrote about it implies that the signified seems to be the 'answer'.. this way you are eliminating the middleman or the role of the signifier. In semiotics it is termed as impossibility.

Here is an example, in semiotics, If no roads point to Rome, it means we ARE in Rome. If all roads point towards Rome, it means we are not in Rome.
Sounds funny but yes this is how signs work !

This is how meanings are interepreted in a post-structuralist context. If the above example sounds funny think about it yet again...

Do we see planet Earth ? No. Why ? We are too close to it, infact we are already on it ! We do not see any signs to show how to get there !

If we are near the moon, we see a blue round globe that is Earth. ( the typical sign of earth ). Many poets would have discribed it elaborately ! So just because we SEE planet earth mean we are in Earth ? Infact it means just the opposite ! It means we are far enough away form earth to see it !

Same way if you are unable to see anything, it means you are too close to it ! If you see something very clearly, it means you are able to distinguish ytourself from it !

If many books pointed in the direction that 'caste was based on varna' was printed in the past two centuries... you can either take the structuralist route and believe that 'yeah, there must be something to it as all roads point to Rome, so we are in Rome !. But is it so ? Hence the added importance to distinguish the difference between the signifier and the signified.

Otherwise two way communication model, 'you'... ( no middle man ).. 'signified' ( ie 'truth' ). The signifier simply is the signified concept is wrong ! It will vary from individual to individual based on his/her mood, culture, age,gender etc etc This is what ALL structuralists did. They all thought thier view was the truth.

If ALL views seemed to point towards one source, it means they all had something in common, ie. racism. Hence whatever they saw, they saw in terms of colour and segregations.

If we are unable to see this, means we are TOO CLOSE to these writers from the Colonialist times. And since it is happening in the issue of caste, it means we are simply following the Colonial perspective of caste. And it will cause stress as we are unable to distance ourselves from the hurting theories !

Now lets move to post-structuralism.

If many books pointed in the direction that 'caste was based on varna' was printed in the past two centuries...then I take the post-structuralist route, and study the signifiers... and come to the conclusion that 18/19th century writers were 'analysing caste origins'. If many of them saw a racial origin, it means THE WRITERS looked at it from a raical stained eye, meaning it is the writers who were race conscious ! What was written about, showes the area where the writers were self conscious. ie Race. Poor writing itself causes problem. Sadly the same was applied to caste.

Hence from these we can come to the view that Colonial writers were racially motivated in all their work they saw races. They applied the same theory to caste. So the concept, caste problem arouse in the past few centuries, by a post-structuralist approach to the issue.

Does this mean post-structuralism aims to tell the truth ? no. It simply shows the cause of the problem/stress. Post-structuralism doesnt give out answers, it only gives out solutions. If answers = truth, then solution = cure.

I am interested in cure and not in truth. Cure can be found by identifying and moving away from the cause of problem. In this case these are the 19/20 th century old book concepts of caste origins/history etc.

3) You say that if a 'certain approach to history causes stress, we need to change course.' Thats not how the history is purported to be utilized or understood. We need to digest the disgusting parts of it too.

Why not apply that to yourself ? You are unable to digest my part, as it seems to be causing you stress. So by that argument arent you who is stuck up ?

Some parts of History are meant to be without any closure its like an open-ended mystery novel. But, still there are 'views that are supported' by what actually took place. We don't look to history to teach us the value of justice or fairplay, we study it for lessons to learn or unlearn more on a cause & effect basis. Its almost like looking at the rear-view mirror in our car -- because sometimes space & time really do warp. And we cannot afford any short-term memory.

well, to me this sounds like a lecture and is very abstract.

So I will also give a lecture, post-structuralism is an interesting concept and it takes time to understand this. There are forumers of varied interest and age here, some have the advantage of having invested more time in these than others. It doesn't mean someone is cleverer than others, it simply means we are good in different things and have different reading interests.

If you are particularly keen on Indian or caste or history I would suggest you look up for some recent work from well renowned authors ( post Saidian school of thought Edward Said, Inden, Nicholas Dirks etc ) as they are a wealth of knowledge. Good luck.

[Fusionist]

To elaborate a bit more on semiotics to those not familiar..

Signifier
The signifier is the pointing finger, the word, the sound-image.

A word is simply a jumble of letters. The pointing finger is not the star. It is in the interpretation of the signifier that meaning is created.

Signified
The signified is the concept, the meaning, the thing indicated by the signifier. It need not be a 'real object' but is some referent to which the signifier refers.

The thing signified is created in the perceiver and is internal to them. Whilst we share concepts, we do so via signifiers.

Whilst the signifier is more stable, the signified varies between people and contexts.

The signified does stabilize with habit, as the signifier cues thoughts and images.

Discussion

The signifier and signified, whilst superficially simple, form a core element of semiotics.

Saussure's ideas are contrary to Plato's notion of ideas being eternally stable. Plato saw ideas as the root concept that was implemented in individual instances. A signifier without signified has no meaning, and the signified changes with person and context. For Saussure, even the root concept is malleable.

The relationship between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary (Saussure called this 'unmotivated'). A real object need not actually exist 'out there'. Whilst the letters 'c-a-t' spell cat, they do not embody 'catness'. The French 'chat' is not identical to the English 'cat' in the signified that it creates (to the French, 'chat' has differences of meaning). In French, 'mouton' means both 'mutton' and a living 'sheep', whilst the English does not differentiate.

Saussure inverts the usual reflectionist view that the signifier reflects the signified: the signifier creates the signified in terms of the meaning it triggers for us. The meaning of a sign needs both the signifier and the signified as created by an interpreter. A signifier without a signified is noise. A signified without a signifier is impossible.

It takes time to learn apply these things to life and we all are ever learning, but atleast there is no shortage of knowledge from now on I hope.

What is this reflectionist view ? If many books point to a source, it means the source is the cause of the problem. ( this is structuralist thought ). This line of thought has been proven wrong.

Instead post-modern view, if a book point to a source it means the writer is stuck and are unable to be dynamic with his thought with repspect to that issue. If many or all writers point to a similar source, it means that the society/age/culture in which the writers come from has a deep problem because of the issue.

So infact if many writers are writing coming to a particular view, THEY are CREATING a problem.

So applying this to caste, we can see how most of the caste based problems was created by the Colonial era writers/scientists etc

[ramvaradan]

Originally Posted by Fusionist

I am not sure where God came into place in this argument, please educate me.

God came because I chose so

Similar to many of your analogies such as 'Rome/Pottery/Earth, etc ..

You are a staunch proponent of non-adherence to theories, when its not suitable to your standpoint. That in of itself is an adherence. Similar to Atheism. When you (I mean not you ) keep saying there is NO GOD. You are losing one religion and signing on-to the other.

I am not stuck with you in this argument.. but I am richer because of this. But I am saying except for some expert prevarications in the guise of exceptional extremes, I am not convinced about your ideas.

Anyways, I will take time to read that refernce you've suggestd. Thanks,

[FM 2258]

Is it a good time to visit Chennai in September weather wise? It looks like a very interesting city.

[Fusionist]

Originally Posted by ramvaradan

God came because I chose so

Similar to many of your analogies such as 'Rome/Pottery/Earth, etc ..

You are a staunch proponent of non-adherence to theories, when its not suitable to your standpoint. That in of itself is an adherence. Similar to Atheism. When you (I mean not you ) keep saying there is NO GOD. You are losing one religion and signing on-to the other.

I am not stuck with you in this argument.. but I am richer because of this. But I am saying except for some expert prevarications in the guise of exceptional extremes, I am not convinced about your ideas.

Anyways, I will take time to read that refernce you've suggestd. Thanks,

I also suppose you are not familiar with the history of the 'athism' like concept floated by the Dravidian nationalists ? Sad, all these have clear historic significance, based on race theories proposed by Caldwell to aid his prostylization

But in case you are interested in reading I can point you to a thread wehre a lot was discussed earlier on this topic..
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...=676618&page=2

Also I would recommend the books..

'Dishonoured by History' by Meena Radhakrisha.
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=g...esult&resnum=4
It shows how some communities suddenly lost thier livelihood due to brutal Colonial laws, and later branded as 'tribes' by racial science and lost favour with the reminder of the society thanks to the British... and later put into barbed wired camps ( 60 million people that is.. about 15% of Indias population at that time ) and brainwashed by the Missionaries. Many of them were also made bonded labourers under the care of other castes, increasing caste hostility.

Review:
http://www.hinduonnet.com/folio/fo0007/00070240.htm
Shows the clear link of present day caste discrimination to Colonial origins.


Crispin Bates’ investigation of colonial anthropometry (‘Race, Caste and Tribe in Central India’)
http://www.csas.ed.ac.uk/fichiers/BA...aste&Tribe.pdf
calls into question the cognitive status of present categories of analysis of castes and tribes by showing the origins of much present ethnographic methodology in the pseudo-scientific theories of nineteenth century racial anthropology.

Anyways like you said, lets move on or atleast take a breather and some time to read new things, no one can come to a conclusion by getting too hot. Its paintful to be stuck on the same point for too long. I for once am taking a breather for sure. Thanks.

[Bless]

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/H...ow/4441822.cms

This is a new form of results from other interpretor, but that leads few questions.
If one believes that this is the literature, then why for years between 1900BC to 500 BC, by abandoning the literature, Vedas are communicated oral from only, by advocating that Sanskrit is speech of god? Basically what is the strong reason to stop writing and use only speech?

On the other hand if you don't believe it is literature, IVC has could have no connection with Vedas, unless one proves the association with them.


Coming to the readers interpretation, Caldwell or Max Muller could have proposed that the people in IVC were Dravidians, with whatever evidence they had with them at that time. if one believes that it is just to advocate the christianity, why would they choose only Tamil/Dravidian people? in order to boost their success rate, they could have very well used similar technique for other languages? [As far as I search in the net, I could not get the similar advocation for other languages]

Their feeling with regards to primitive words like numerals Sanskrit, Greece, Latin must have a common root

ek -do - teen - char - panch - chhah - saat - aath - nao [ This is hindi very similar to sanskrit]
hen - do - Tri - tetra - penta - Hexa - Hepta - Octa - nona [ Greek]
they looks very similar sounding.

On the other hand Dravidian languages use similar to them-selfs and totally different from I-E languages.
That is the reason they opt to say so that vedic people could have come from some common place north west of indian peninsula.

And dating of vedas: I agree its difficult, but i read in one incident that they mention about drying of river sarasvathi, and same people claim that sarasvathi dried in 1900BC, if they mention that saravathi drying then at least that particular verse should have been added to Vedas later than BC 1900.

Using astronomical event to suggest earlier period for Vedas also brings the similar questions, if any one who can find a period for cycle, one can opt to tell the older time easily and can write about those events.

[die4chennai]

CHENNAI: If you are interested in the history of the city you live in, there are plenty of books around. So what's

interesting about yet
another book on Chennai? The fact that it will give you enough information about the city from
the paleolithic to the modern age in simple language in just 80 pages.

"It is a book oriented mainly towards young people," says Nanditha Krishna, director of CP Ramaswami Aiyar Foundation, about her latest book Madras-Chennai: Its History and Environment'. An environmentalist and educationist, Nanditha discovered while running The Grove School that many children knew nothing about the city they were growing up in.

"A lot of people have done wonderful work on Madras but people are reluctant to go through heavy tomes; I wanted to bring out a book that could be read by anyone aged 12 and above," says Nanditha. The result is Madras-Chennai'.

"The idea for the book was conceived in 1999, when we did a project with the Ministry of Human Resources Development called Clean Madras, Green Madras'. As part of it we brought out a simple book with information on Chennai in Tamil and English and distributed it to 350 schools," she says.

From information about the city's natural resources to the ancient settlements around Chennai, the book covers a variety of topics in a concise and precise manner. It explores the concept of temple towns and also tells you how each place got its name.

"The city is rich in history," says Nanditha. For instance, the first paleolithic relic in India was found in Pallavaram, just south of Madras, by Robert Bruce Foote. Later, more paleoliths were found there and elsewhere, in and around Madras.

The last chapter deals with problems the city now faces from scarcity of water to air pollution and suggests possible solutions. Adding value are some rare paintings of Chennai, sourced from the collection of V Narayan Swami. "The book will be used in schools next year; we are giving it to about 50 schools in Chennai which are part of our green intiative," says Nanditha. "A few ICSE and CBSE schools will also be introducing it for one year as a history textbook." The next step is to also bring it out in Tamil so that it can reach out to Tamil-medium students.

'Madras-Chennai', released by Dr MS Swaminathan on Wednesday as part of the Madras Week celebrations, is available in two formats. The black and white version, published by New Horizon Media, is priced at Rs 25, while the fully colour version, published by CPR Publications, costs Rs 200.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/n...ow/4913269.cms

[satishanu]

From a tiny fishing hamlet to a bustling metropolis with major automobile units, a thriving IT industry and pride of place as the cultural capital of the South, its been a long and eventful journey for Chennai, the erstwhile Madras, which turns 370 on Saturday.

As befits the historic occasion, a grand week-long birthday bash has been drawn up to mark 'Madras day' celebrations -- a wide canvas of cultural and literary activities.

Heritage walks, school exchange programmes, talks and contests, poetry and Carnatic music and quiz, food festivals and rallies, photo exhibitions and bike tours will give the true blue Chennaites glimpses of the city they never knew and of some things they do.

It was on this day in 1639 that British Administrator Francis Day got permission from the wards of Chennapa Naicker, a chieftain ruling the fishing hamlet near Madras Harbour to construct Madraspatam, as it was referred then by the British.

The deal was struck by Francis Day, his 'dubash' Beri Thimmappa and their superior Andrew Cogan, with local Nayak rulers.

The original document relating to building of Fort St. George, a historic fort which was for a while the seat of power of the East India Company, is said to have been signed at Chandragiri fort in neighbouring Andhra Pradesh.

Robert Clive, founder of British empire in India, got married in a church inside the fort. His marriage certificate is still the prize possession of the museum in the fort.

http://www.ndtv.com/news/offbeat/hap...ay_chennai.php

[ferrari_fan]

Originally Posted by FM 2258

Is it a good time to visit Chennai in September weather wise? It looks like a very interesting city.

The best time of year in Chennai would probably be end-January/early February when the temperatures are at their coolest for the year..

But yes - September is also a pretty good time to make a trip - temperatures are relatively bearable, but there may be a little rain at times so carry a raincoat..

Hope you have an enjoyable trip..

[Fusionist]

Chennai is a lot older than 370 yrs old. The idea that it came into existance 370 should be abandoned and the 'Madras Day' event completely scrapped. Possibly something like Thai Pongal or Kanum Pongal be evolved with art, culture shows, peagents, folk dance etc in Marina to celebrate the city and its tradition.

[neohistoryman]

No doubt the area which is now Chennai has been there since time immemorial, just as you could say with any other place on this earth. However, the seed that has now blossomed into the metropolis that is now Chennai was planted 370 years ago. Prior to that it was not a Madurai or a Tanjavur. It is therefore symbolically an important date for the people of Chennai.

I am infact happy that the concept of Madras Week been steadily gaining ground in the last few years. It provides a platform for the citizens of Chennai to reflect on the city and its heritage- both architecturally and culturally. Conservation efforts - of both buildings and the natural environment - have got a boost and I think there is more awareness about this even at a government level. It gives an opportunity for the younger generation to learn more about the history of the city and fosters a sense of involvement. Last but not the least, events like these gives a sense of pride and ownership which will help develop the city further.

There are so many other events which celebrate our culture of which Chennai Sangamam is a good example. I think Madras Week should remain so and continue to focus on what I think it is doing quite well.

[umesh90]

May be I am not good at this but why such harsh language when we talk about supposed aryans and dravidians, while it is a fact Portuguese where more ruthless and made so many convertions and demolished every temples in the land they ruled and ruthless to the core killing many , British made Jinnah who was against partions till 1943(or is it 43) to go for partition, Made sure two civil code and other difference exist so Hindus and muslims never become friends. While Tamil politicians talk about GOD not being there, they mean Hindus only ( For your info I am not a firm believer of GOD ). They dont talk about arabic being used in Mosques but oppose Sanskrit in temples. While This aryans and Draviidians co existed ( Assuming Aryans are from other land) for aeons and no such oppression was visible till our great masters came and rescued India.

Any how I may be totally wrong but My point though

[ranga]

Originally Posted by umesh90

May be I am not good at this but why such harsh language when we talk about supposed aryans and dravidians, while it is a fact Portuguese where more ruthless and made so many convertions and demolished every temples in the land they ruled and ruthless to the core killing many , British made Jinnah who was against partions till 1943(or is it 43) to go for partition, Made sure two civil code and other difference exist so Hindus and muslims never become friends. While Tamil politicians talk about GOD not being there, they mean Hindus only ( For your info I am not a firm believer of GOD ). They dont talk about arabic being used in Mosques but oppose Sanskrit in temples. While This aryans and Draviidians co existed ( Assuming Aryans are from other land) for aeons and no such oppression was visible till our great masters came and rescued India.

Any how I may be totally wrong but My point though

Muslims invaded and ruled for about700 years before the British landed here.There is nothing positive to talk about muslim rulers who were barbaric,ruthless fanatics subjecting the native hindu population to unimaginable miseries.Muslims and hindus were never friends and the Brits have nothing to do about it.Tamil politicians think about hindu Gods only privately. Most of the so called hindu politicians do not know much of their own religion and absolutely nothing about Islam,Christianity,Sikhism etc

[umesh90]

Originally Posted by ranga

Muslims invaded and ruled for about700 years before the British landed here.There is nothing positive to talk about muslim rulers who were barbaric,ruthless fanatics subjecting the native hindu population to unimaginable miseries.Muslims and hindus were never friends and the Brits have nothing to do about it.Tamil politicians think about hindu Gods only privately. Most of the so called hindu politicians do not know much of their own religion and absolutely nothing about Islam,Christianity,Sikhism etc

exactly, My point about partition was on the lines of converted muslims and not about muslim invaders who were def as you put ruthless barbaric. To think about at least a lakh of hindus killed on the street of Delhi by Timur, To think about Hindu kush, literally meaning killing of Hindus ,and conservatively put fig of minimum in millions killed, or Akbar killing 30000 rajputs after chitod battle. But atleast we could have saved our country from being broken, any how thanks for your reply

[Fusionist]

both Mughal as well as British invasions were brutal and fragmented society. But the difference is to look at it from how it affects present day lives. Muslims do not have much say as they were subjugated by the British. However the same cannot be said about Colonial sponsored ideologies which still hold power is one guise or other be it through outdated education system, altered perception of history, concealing Christian agression, the concepts of crime and punishment as imposed by the Penal code doctrines etc etc.

So it makes a difference who is affecting you most. To me it is British colonialist ideology and not necessarily Muslims hence the need to reinvest time to clarify history and ideology.

btw, please let us make a distinction between my criticism which is aimed at Colonial sponsored ideology, based on Evangelical ethos etc and not necessarily against Christians. Both are different. However it does become problematic when some section of people ( from all communities ) actively defend outdated theories and cover up abuse as they fasely identify too much with certain identites for too long. Well no one here is above it all I suppose, as we all have emotional attachments and detachments, so no moral highs, but it becomes a problem once it starts choking society too much.

[Arul Murugan]

சென்னையும் சிவப்பு நிற கட்டடங்களும்

சென்னையிலுள்ள பல பிரசித்தி பெற்ற, சிவப்பு நிறத்திலுள்ள கட்டடங்களை உருவாக்கிய கட்டட மேதை, "தாட்டிகொண்ட நம்பெருமாள்' செட்டியார் என்பவர். பாரிமுனையில் உள்ள ஐகோர்ட், சட்டக்கல்லூரி, எழும்பூரில் உள்ள சிற்பக் கலை கல்லூரி, மியூசியம், கன்னிமாரா நூலகம் போன்றவை இவரால் கட்டப்பட்டவை.பதினெட்டாம் நூற்றாண்டின் நடுவில் வாழ்ந்த இவரது மாளிகை, "வெள்ளை மாளிகை' என்ற பெயருடன், சேத்துப்பட்டு மேம்பாலம் அருகில், டாக்டர் மேத்தா மருத்துவமனையின் பின்னால் உள்ளது.இதில், மூன்று மாடிகள், 30 அறைகள் உள்ளன.இது அருங்காட்சியகமாக மாற் றப்பட்டுள்ளது. சீனா, ஜப்பான், இத்தாலி, இங்கிலாந்து போன்ற நாடுகளில், பீங்கானில் செய்யப் பட்ட அரிய கலைப் பொருட்கள் அங்கு வைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளன.


எழும்பூர் பாந்தியன் சாலையிலிருந்து, ஆரிங்டன் சாலை வரை (தற்போதைய டெய்லர்ஸ் ரோடு) உள்ள நிலப்பரப்பு அவருக்கு சொந்தமாக இருந்தது.அதனால், "செட்டியார் பேட்டை' என அழைக்கப் பட்டது.நாளடைவில், "செட்டிபேட்டை' என மருவி, இன்று, "செட்பெட்' என மாறிவிட்டது. அப்போது இருந்த ஆங்கிலேய அதிகாரிகள், அமைதியை விரும்பியதால், செட்டியாரின் நிலத்தை வாங்கி, அவரையே வீடுகள் கட்டித் தரும்படி கேட்டுக் கொண் டனர்.அப்பகுதியில் இன்றும் அனேக வீடுகள் ஆங்கிலேய பெயர்களாக காசா மேஜர், ஜாரட்ஸ் கார்டன் (தற்போது சமூக சேவா பள்ளி) ஹாரிங்டன், பாந்தியன் என்று பெயர்.


கணிதமேதை - ராமானுஜம்: காலம் சென்ற கணித மேதை கடைசி நாட்களை செட்டியார் வீட்டில் கழித்தார்.இங்கிலாந்திலிருந்து திரும்பிய ராமானுஜருக்கு, காசநோய் அதிகமாகி விட்டதால், அவரது உறவினர்கள் பயந்துபோய், திருவல்லிக் கேணியில் இருந்த அவர்களது வீட்டில் வைத்துக் கொள்ளவில்லை.அப்போது, நம்பெருமாள் செட்டியார் அவரை அழைத்து வந்து, தனி அறை, தனி சமையல், சிறப்பு வைத்தியம் முதலிய ஏற்பாடுகள் செய்து, அவரைக் காப்பாற்ற எல்லா முயற்சிகளையும் செய்தார்.ஆனால், ராமானுஜம் முட்டை முதலியவற்றை சாப்பிட மறுத்ததால், காசநோய்க்கு இளம் வயதில் பலியானார். தமிழ்நாடு மிகப்பெரிய கணிதமேதையை இழந்தது. அவர், கடல் கடந்து வெளிநாடு சென்றதால், அவரது உடலைக் கூட ஏற்றுக்கொள்ள உறவினர்கள் மறுத்தனர். ஆதலால், நம்பெருமாள் செட்டி அவர்களே அவரது ஈமச் சடங்குகளை செய்தார். ராமானுஜத்தின் மரணச் சான்றிதழ், இன்றும் செட்டியார் வீட்டில் வைக்கப்பட்டுள்ளது.


சென்னை பல்கலைக்கழகத்தில் பி.ஏ., பட்டம் பெற்ற முதல் வைசியர் நம்பெருமாள். முன்னாள் இம்பீரியல் வங்கி (தற்போது எஸ்.பி.ஐ.,) நியமனம் செய்த முதல் இந்திய டைரக்டர். சென்னை மாகாணத்தின் மேல் சட்டசபைக்கு நியமிக்கப்பட்ட முதல் இந்தியர்.முதன் முதலாக வெளிநாட்டு கார் (பிரெஞ்ச் டிட்கன்) வாங்கிய முதல் இந்தியர். தற்போது இந்த கார் யுனைடெட் கம்பெனி சேர்மன் விஜய் மல்லையாவிடம் உள்ளது.தன் சொந்த உபயோகத்திற்காக, நான்கு பெட்டிகள் தனி ரயில் வண்டி வைத்திருந்தார்.


திருவள்ளூர் வீரராகவ பெருமாள் கோவிலுக்கு சென்று வர இந்த ரயிலை உபயோகித்தார்.ராவ் சாகிப், ராவ் பகதூர், திவான் பகதூர் பட்டங்களை, தான் ஈட்டிய பணத்தில் பெரும் பகுதியை, சமஸ்கிருத வளர்ச்சி, வைணவ கோவில்களின் திருப் பணி, ஏழைகளின் கல்வி, மருத்துவம் போன்றவற்றிற்கு கொடுத்து உதவினார்.வடசென்னையில் பல பள்ளிகளும், சேத்துப்பட்டிலுள்ள சேவா சதனம் வளாகத்தில், தாட்டிகொண்ட நாச்சாரம்மா மருத்துவமனையும் நடைபெறுகின்றன.சென்னையின் வளர்ச்சியில் இவரது சேவை சிறப்பானது. (சென்னையின் வயது 370)

DINAMALAR

[Bless]

thanks for such a good news, I came to know about one more good engineers of history.

[Robinsmith]

Oh..so many information about singara chennai...please post the source...otherwise hard to believe.