I have been blogging since April 2011. As everyone knows,
this blog is about the history of Malankara Nazranies based on modern research
and studies. It has nothing to do with faith, churches, or Christian
philosophies. The articles published here are based on studies conducted over a
prolonged period, checking credentials of sources, evidence, etc. That is why
most of the findings or outlook expressed or stated here go against
conventional narratives of church historians or believers. Hence, it has
attracted much criticism as well as appreciation.
Since 2011, many enthusiasts, researchers, and readers have
contacted me over phone, e-mail, or personal visits and requested more
information and explanations. Most of the research students or independent
research persons ask for help from me regarding the history of Christianity in
Kerala, India. I often help them by providing my articles, opinions, sources,
analytical observations, methodologies, etc. in return for a byline or a
citation as a reward for my work.
But some vociferously criticized me for my attitude towards
different Syriac Churches, and my explanation was that a history student cannot
manipulate it based on church requirements. I have no regrets or naïve attitude
towards critics of my papers. Some of my severe critics and detractors turned
friends in due course of time.
But my concern here is a new trend in extensively copying
and using my research/studies without any byline or credit to its author. Some
researchers use technical terms coined by me, some use paragraphs, some the
methodology or analysis without mentioning/citing my name, article name, or the
blog address. I have even come across a fellow who completely copied one of my
articles and posted it in a serious discussion group without citation or a
byline.
Last year, there was a research scholar from one of the
famous universities of Britain who contacted me over the phone asking for help
in understanding one of my articles regarding Chaldeanisation (kaldayavadam)
among certain groups of Syro-Malabar Roman Catholics. She told me that she got
the article and my cell number from a friend but rejected revealing the
identity of that person. Since I was least bothered about that, I explained the
article, provided the sources, the methodology, etc. and gave her my blog's
link so that she could use it for her studies/research. During the period of
the past one year, she contacted me a few times over the phone, and we engaged
in lengthy discussions. During these discussions, I informed her about my work
on Persian Crosses, Vatican Syriac Codex 22, Tharissa palli Plates, Population
studies of Malankara Nazranies Vs Syro-Malabar Catholics, etc. and asked her to
read it in this blog. She was aware of my pen name on Facebook and my original
name from our first contact.
A few days ago, she sent me an email pretending to be
unaware of our discussions and requesting my number to talk to me regarding my
article on the Vatican Syriac Codex 22. I was quite amused and sent her a reply
that we were already in contact and that she could call me any time. But she
asked me to contact her over the phone so that she could call me. Since I found
no logic in her email request, I didn’t telephone her. Subsequently, she called
me on Friday, and we engaged in a long discussion as usual. She wanted to know
all about the methodology, sources, and conclusion of my study. I explained
everything regarding the Vatican Codex 22 manipulation, sources, methodology,
conclusion, etc., over the phone, and she suddenly said that she had also
arrived at the same conclusion. I was totally astonished by her statement when
barely a year ago, she did not know about the Vatican Syriac Codex 22
manipulation at all. It was me who suggested the possibility and gave her my
paper on the subject as a reply to her inquiry on my negation of Nestorian
hierarchy before 1490 AD.
Understanding her hidden agenda, I tactically made a statement
that the term "Malankara Moopan" - head of Malankara Nazranies was
coined by me, and now it is used by every research scholar in their paper. Some
give citation/byline, but the majority do not care to do that. She outrightly
said that she would not be able to give citation to my papers/articles/work
since I had not written a book. My study on the Vatican Syriac Codex 22 was
done in 2010 and published through my blog in April 2012. If she is using my
study partly, fully or using the methodology, analysis of source materials,
etc., she should give a byline/citation/accreditation in my name/blog. She
repeatedly rejected it and disconnected the phone.
I understand that she called me to clear her doubts on my
paper on the Vatican Syriac Codex 22. It can be logically deduced from my
conversation with her that she might have stolen my study and promoted it as
her study to concerned scholars. But she faced many questions which she could
not answer, that is why she played this drama.
I have sent her a detailed reply on this subject and warned
her on infringement on my intellectual property right on my paper/blog
article/work. But, categorically offered her that she can use my
work/paper/blog article if she is willing to give accreditation/byline/citation
in my Name/Blog.
This is written here to inform my readers that these blog
articles are just a prelude to my upcoming book on Malankara Nazranies/Syriac
Christianity in India. Now readers can understand the reason why this blog is
not continuously updated. But I regularly observe the comments and reply to
them.
Thanks & regards.
Jeevan Philip
