- a. Marudhu brothers
- b. Puli Thevar
- c. Velunachiyar
- d. Veerapandya Kattabomman
Puli Thevar (mid-18th century) was the earliest known Palayakkarar leader who resisted the East India Company's expansion in the Tamil country.
b
- a. 24 May 1805
- b. 10 July 1805
- c. 10 July 1806
- d. 10 September 1806
The Vellore Revolt (Vellore Mutiny) took place on 10 July 1806.
c
- a. Kayathar
- b. Nagalapuram
- c. Virupachi
- d. Panchalankurichi
The chapter text (page 73) states: "Sivasubramanianar was executed at Nagalapuram on 13th September." Therefore the correct option is Nagalapuram.
b
- a. Col. Fancourt
- b. Major Armstrong
- c. Sir John Cradock
- d. Colonel Agnew
The raw text states: "the commander-in-chief Sir John Cradock, the Adjutant General Agnew ... were held responsible for the revolt" — indicating Sir John Cradock was the commander-in-chief associated with the military regulations.
c) Sir John Cradock
- a. Calcutta
- b. Mumbai
- c. Delhi
- d. Mysore
After the Vellore Mutiny the British moved Tipu Sultan's sons to safer custody in Calcutta (Fort William) to prevent any attempt to restore Tipu's family.
a
- a. Marudhu brothers
- b. Puli Thevar
- c. Velunachiyar
- d. Veerapandya Kattabomman
Same as above: Puli Thevar is historically recognized as the first Palayakkarar leader to oppose Company encroachment.
b
- a. Velunachiyar
- b. Kattabomman
- c. Puli Thevar
- d. Oomai thurai
The chapter text states that three Pathan officers (agents of Nawab Chanda Sahib) "supported the Tamil palayakkarars… Puli Thevar had established close relationships with them." Therefore the correct answer is Puli Thevar.
c
- a. Kayathar
- b. Nagalapuram
- c. Virupachi
- d. Panchalankurichi
Corrected using the chapter text: page 73 records that "Sivasubramanianar was executed at Nagalapuram on 13th September." The original OCR for this exercise (provided with this item) had incorrect option choices; they have been restored to match the textbook exercise and the correct answer is Nagalapuram.
b
- a. Marudhu brothers
- b. Puli Thevar
- c. Veerapandya Kattabomman
- d. Gopala Nayak
The raw textbook page explicitly records that the Marudhu Pandyars (Marudhu brothers) issued the Tiruchirappalli Proclamation in June 1801. Therefore the correct answer is (a) Marudhu brothers.
a
- a. 24 May 1805
- b. 10 July 1805
- c. 10 July 1806
- d. 10 September 1806
Same as above: 10 July 1806.
c
- a. Col. Fancourt
- b. Major Armstrong
- c. Sir John Cradock
- d. Colonel Agnew
As on page text: "the commander-in-chief Sir John Cradock ... were held responsible for the revolt" — Sir John Cradock is therefore the commander-in-chief referred to.
c) Sir John Cradock
- a. Kayathar
- b. Nagalapuram
- c. Virupachi
- d. Panchalankurichi
The raw text on the page states: "Tipu's sons were ordered to be sent to Calcutta." (The OCR options on this exercise page are incorrect/misplaced; the correct destination from the textbook text is Calcutta.)
Calcutta
- a. Marudhu brothers
- b. Puli Thevar
- c. Veerapandya Kattabomman
- d. Gopala Nayak
The textbook text (page 74) states that in June 1801 the Marudhu Pandyars (Marudhu brothers) issued the Tiruchirappalli Proclamation of Independence. Hence the correct choice is (a) Marudhu brothers.
a
- a. 24 May 1805
- b. 10 July 1805
- c. 10 July 1806
- d. 10 September 1806
The Vellore Mutiny (revolt) broke out on the night of 10 July 1806.
c
The Palayakkarar (poligar) system was established under the Nayak rulers of South India (particularly the Madurai Nayaks) as local military and revenue chiefs.
The Nayak rulers (Madurai Nayaks)
Velu Nachiyar fled after the loss of her kingdom and is recorded in many sources to have taken refuge under the protection of Hyder Ali for a period (commonly stated as about eight years) before returning to fight the British and reclaim territory.
Hyder Ali
The textbook (page 73 of the supplied raw pages) states: "Bannerman deputed Ramalinganar to convey a message asking Kattabomman to surrender." Therefore the blank should be filled with 'Ramalinganar.'
Ramalinganar
This statement is historically accurate in the context of the late-1790s Palayakkarar conflicts: Lord Cornwallis dispatched Company forces in 1799 to suppress the revolts in the Tirunelveli region.
True
- a. Both (A) and (R) are correct, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)
- b. Both (A) and (R) are wrong
- c. Both (A) and (R) are correct and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)
- d. (A) is wrong and (R) is correct
Puli Thevar did seek assistance from Hyder Ali and the French. Hyder Ali was preoccupied with other major conflicts (including with the Marathas), and therefore could not offer effective help. Thus both statements are correct and R explains A.
c
- a. (i), (ii) and (iv) are correct
- b. (i), (ii) and (iii) are correct
- c. (iii) and (iv) are correct
- d. (i) and (iv) are correct
Statement (i) is incorrect (Palayakkarars were a Tamil/Nayak-era institution, not associated with the Kakatiya kingdom). Statements (iii) and (iv) are supported by textbook accounts. Statement (ii) is uncertain/varies by source, so the safest listed choice is (iii) and (iv).
c
Using the chapter text: • Theerthagiri is the birth name of Dheeran Chinnamalai; he built the fort called Odanilai → Theerthagiri → Odanilai. • Gopala Nayak led the Dindigul League and operated from Virupachi/Dindigul → Gopala Nayak → Dindigul. • Major Bannerman commanded the siege of Panchalankurichi and deputed Ramalinganar to carry messages during the siege → Bannerman → Ramalinganar. • Subedar Sheik Adam was one of the organisers/leaders in the Vellore uprising → Subedar Sheik Adam → Vellore Revolt.
1. Theerthagiri — Odanilai
2. Gopala Nayak — Dindigul
3. Bannerman — Ramalinganar
4. Subedar Sheik Adam — Vellore Revolt
Concise duties: (1) Revenue collection and local administration; (2) Maintaining a military force and defending the palayam; (3) Ensuring internal law and order; (4) Supplying soldiers to higher authority in wartime; (5) Managing local justice and dispute resolution.
The Palayakkarars (poligars) collected revenue, maintained law and order in their territories, maintained and supplied troops to the ruling Nayak/king when required, defended their forts/territories, and administered local justice.
The chapter lists the prominent eastern and western palayams. Eastern: Sattur, Nagalapuram, Ettayapuram, Panchalankurichi. Western: Uthumalai, Thalavankottai, Naduvakurichi, Singampatti, Seithur.
Eastern Palayams: Sattur, Nagalapuram, Ettayapuram, Panchalankurichi.
Western Palayams: Uthumalai, Thalavankottai, Naduvakurichi, Singampatti, Seithur.
Concise significance: (1) Showed united local opposition to Company rule and the determination of poligars; (2) Exposed the limits of Company's local control and prompted larger military expeditions into the Tirunelveli region; (3) Became a rallying event in the sequence of early revolts against the East India Company in Tamil Nadu.
The Battle of Kalakadu demonstrated strong local resistance to Company authority and delayed British consolidation in the region; it revealed the willingness of Palayakkarars (poligars) to cooperate against the Company and forced the British to escalate military measures in southern Tamil Nadu.
Brief explanation: The conflict arose because the East India Company demanded payment of revenue/peshkash and the right to station its officers; Kattabomman resisted these intrusions on his authority, refused to hand over dues and opposed Company interference in local administration, which led to open hostility.
The main dispute was over revenue/tribute and the Company's interference in palayam autonomy—Kattabomman refused to submit to Company demands for taxes/dues and to accept Company revenue officers, asserting his independence.
Essence in brief: The proclamation announced firm Company governance measures in the Carnatic/Tamil regions, aimed at pacification and administrative reorganisation after the poligar revolts; it sought to replace unstable local rule with direct Company administration while extending promises of stability to compliant local rulers and subjects.
The Tiruchirappalli Proclamation of 1801 asserted Company authority in the region, reorganized administration, promised order and security, and offered terms to those who submitted—marking a step in consolidating British civil control in southern India.
Key points to include in an essay: (1) Background — Kattabomman was a poligar (palaiyakkarar) of Panchalankurichi who valued palayam autonomy; (2) Causes — refusal to pay Company dues and reject Company interference; (3) Course — exchanges of threats and skirmishes, defensive measures at Panchalankurichi, alliances with neighbouring chiefs; (4) Climax — British siege and capture (after betrayal), and his subsequent execution; (5) Significance — his resistance inspired later uprisings, symbolised native opposition to Company revenue policies and loss of traditional rights. Keep answer focused on events, motives and legacy.
Veerapandya Kattabomman of Panchalankurichi bravely resisted the East India Company's attempts to impose revenue demands and administrative control over his palayam. He refused Company demands, fortified his stronghold, and engaged in several skirmishes with Company forces. His defiance inspired other local chiefs and became a symbol of resistance. The British mounted a concerted campaign, besieged Panchalankurichi, and, after being betrayed, Kattabomman was captured and executed. His courageous stand and martyrdom made him a regional hero in Tamil Nadu and an early symbol of anti-colonial resistance.
Structure for a detailed answer: (1) Background — Sivagangai under local rulers resisted Company encroachment; Velu Nachiyar initially fought and later leaders like the Maruthu brothers continued resistance; (2) Events — sustained guerilla actions and battles against Company forces; (3) Fall — decisive military defeat of the local leaders and capture/execution of principal resistors; (4) Outcome — annexation or tight Company supervision of Sivagangai, suppression of palayakkarar power, and strengthening of British administration in southern Tamil Nadu; (5) Legacy — martyrdom of leaders inspired later anti-British sentiment and is remembered in local history. (Consult the textbook for names, dates and location details to include if required.)
Sivagangai's fall refers to the British suppression of the local ruling house after prolonged resistance led by Velu Nachiyar and later the Maruthu brothers. Ultimately the British defeated the leaders, executed key resistors, and brought the kingdom under firm Company control. The outcome was the loss of local independence, punitive measures against rebels, and deeper British administrative control in the region.
Points to cover: (1) Immediate causes — introduction of new dress regulations and changes to headgear that violated religious/caste norms and the ban on traditional marks; (2) Underlying causes — grievances over pay, disciplinary measures, and distrust of British intentions (including rumours of religious conversion); (3) Course — sepoys seized the fort, killed several officers and officials, and raised local leaders’ support briefly; (4) Outcome — rapid suppression by reinforcements from Arcot/Madurai, punishments for rebels and review of some military policies; (5) Significance — first major military uprising after 1800, showed fragility of British reliance on native troops and forced the Company to reconsider policy changes that offended religious sentiments.
The Vellore Revolt (1806) broke out due to multiple grievances among Indian sepoys: resentment over new uniform and headgear regulations that offended religious and caste sensibilities, prohibition of religious marks, rumours of forced conversions, poor pay and treatment, and general discontent with British interference in military customs. These factors combined to spark a sudden and violent uprising in the Vellore fort, which was quickly suppressed but signalled widespread unrest in the Company's army.