Case Study #1 – Kittur (c. 1785): Burhan‑ud‑din Intervenes Against Forced Extortion
When Tipu Sultan’s forces expanded into new territories, local administrators were sometimes tempted to extract wealth through coercion. However, the case of Kittur demonstrates that Tipu’s government actively intervened to prevent such oppression – even when it meant overruling its own revenue officials.
Following the occupation of Nargund, Tipu’s commander Burhan‑ud‑din marched toward Kittur, whose ruler Mallasayja had revolted. The Desai of Kittur quickly capitulated, realising resistance was futile. Yet, despite this surrender, Venkat Rangayya – a deputy appointed by Tipu to collect arrears of tribute amounting to five and a half lakhs of rupees – proceeded to imprison the chief, his family, and his minister Gurupant. He also began to harass the people of Kittur, forcibly extorting large sums of money.
When Burhan‑ud‑din learned of this oppression, he did not look away. He intervened directly: he secured the release of the chief and Gurupant, assured them of their safety, and publicly remonstrated with Venkat Rangayya for his oppressive measures. So serious was this rebuke that Venkat Rangayya, unable to tolerate Burhan’s interference, left for Dharwar in a fit of anger.
The outcome was notable: although Tipu ultimately annexed Kittur, he set apart a regular sum of money for the support of its deposed chief – a deliberate departure from outright plunder. This case shows that Tipu’s commanders were expected to uphold a standard of conduct that restrained arbitrary extortion, even in recently conquered territories.
Source: Khan, M. H. (1951). History of Tipu Sultan. Calcutta: The Bibliophile Ltd. (pp. 100-101)
Leave a Reply