What's in "Aarakshan"?: Is Reservation Debate Resuming?

[happyhindu]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Series on Slavery: Part 3c

This is on land holdings under the Cholas in Tamilakam from 871 AD to 1279 AD. These notes are taken from 2 sources

[1] MD Rajukumar. Struggles for Rights during Later Chola Period. Social Scientist, Vol. 2, No. 6/7 (Jan. - Feb., 1974), pp. 29-35.

[2] Institute of Social Anthropology, University of Oxford (2007). Contributions to Indian sociology, Volume 40, Issues 1-2, p.98

Land grants under Cholas were of 3 kinds

1) Devadanam land: belonged to temples
2) Brahmadeya land: belonged to Brahmins
3) Velan Vagai: belonged to Vellalars
4) Jeevitha land: land given as grants to various officials, including dancing girls, and soldiers, for a living.

Of all these only the Devadanam and Brahmadeya were Irayili, or tax-free land everywhere. But in some places, Jeevitha land and belonging to certain individuals were exempt from taxes.

The Parayans were agricultural slaves in the Chola domains. Couple of things to note are:

1) The drum which was a symbol of bravery, celebration and nagaramai (civilization) became a symbol of pollution under the Chola Kingdom.

2) Suppression of Parayas / Pallans either started during the chola period or was in full swing in the Chola Kingdom.

Brahmins and Velalala landlords were vested with hegemony and authority in the feudal system. Several revolts burst out in opposition to tax burdens and in pursuit of the rights of sections of the people.

Tax-free land (Devadanams and Brahmadeyams) was considerable and expanded over time. Hence, small cultivators and other sections of the people had to bear an increasingly punishing tax burden.

Inscriptions provide evidence of
a) movements refusing to pay taxes;
b) movements for the reduction of taxes;
c) campaigns in opposition to certain taxes;
d) campaigns of cultivators themselves fixing the tax rate
e) movements for better wages

Several inscriptions suggest that the movement for the reduction of taxes was conducted with militancy. Farmers refused to sow until the objectionable taxes were lowered. They took shelter in other villages and refused to enter their own villages until the taxes were lowered.

Brahmin and Velala landlords had their lands cultivated by Parayas. In the case of Brahmin landlords who "did not have even the semblance of direct connection with the cultivation of the land, their role as parasites was directly and immediately identifiable" (exactly paraphrased from the article of Rajukumar that incidentally was translated into english by N.Ram).

In the Ur and Sabhai, the dominance of the Brahmins and Velalas prevailed. Apart from the king and the governors, the Ur and the Sabhai were vested with the authority to levy taxes. Landless agricultural labourers were denied a place in these organizations. They had no voice except agitate thru revolts.

Brahmin and Velala landlords, with official connivance, were known to tamper with and transformed the title deeds. They exploited their hegemony in the Ur, Sabhai and Koyilsabhai, and destroyed existing title deeds and documents and cooked up documents in their own favour. Thus they transformed cultivation rights, raising their own share of the produce and defrauded small cultivators. The toiling people of the 'right hand' and 'left hand' united in an assembly called to oppose this practice and decided not to help or co-operate in any way with Brahmin and Velala landlords and officials.

An instance is mentioned where Parayars demanded higher wages, the landlords refused. The veterans of the Ur and the Sabhai expected to crush the fighting people by repression, but failed to do so. With the struggle progressing to a stage where blood was shed, the demand was conceded.

Several struggles erupted over time against the oppression of the Brahmin and Velala landlords. Parayars also started a movement for ownership of land.

The Ukkal inscription of the Chingleput region tells us that the Kammalars (which refer to five categories of artisans: carpenters, blacksmiths, metal workers, goldsmiths and stone workers) fought against the monopoly of privileges in the hands of Brahmins and Velalas. The Kammalars won the right
a) to blow the double conch
b) to beat the berigai and other drums,
c) to wear foot-wear
d) to plaster their houses with limestone.

An inscription found at Kiranur in the Madurai region refers to rights won by the Idaiyar (shepherds) in Cholanallur to
a) to put up walls and to plaster them,
b) to use palanquins on good occasions and biers on bad occasions
c) to beat uvacchu (drums) on good and bad occasions.

So what is seen is that people themselves had to initiate struggles at every opportunity to fight for social rights.

But in this great "natural order of dharma" there were 2 kinds of Brahmins – one was the class of Brahmins who dominated Ur and Sabhai, and another was the class who had to fight for their rights (my note - perhaps the latter were the gurukkals and chozhiyars who had nothing to do with militancy). So instances of Brahmins opposing Brahmins (the latter against the former) also existed.

One inscription tells us of the fine imposed on Kuvaniyan Sreekapatan, Sree Krishnan and Sreekapatan Periyandan for setting fire to the house of a Brahmin named Harinarayanan. A Brahmin immolated himself to express his protest against a temple management which had refused him a right in the temple.

It was the practice to record in temple inscriptions the details of who owned and who cultivated the land, as well as the decisions of the Ur, Sabhai and Koyilsabhai. From this it is understood why temples were involved in the struggle for land rights.

The ordinary cultivators conducted many struggles against the alienation of the lands cultivated by them and against the conversion of these lands into Brahmadeya or Devadanam. When entire villages were converted into Brahmadeyas or Devadanams, cultivators were forcibly removed from their lands and settled elsewhere.

In some places, it was decreed that non-Brahmins must sell the lands they cultivated within Brahmin villages (Chaturvedi Mangalams). A Thiruvarur inscription mentions the eviction of those who cultivated temple lands and the allotment of these lands on lease to others. Another inscription tells us that the king decreed the replacement of cultivators-on-lease.

Sometimes cultivators broke down temple walls which bore inscriptions recording decrees and decisions alienating them from the lands they cultivated.

An inscription found at Tiruvarangam describes a struggle in the second year of the reign of Kulothunga I (1071-1122). An entire village known as Rajamahendra Chaturvedimangalam was burnt down; sites of pilgrimage were destroyed. Even the heart of the temple was razed to the ground. So it means enraged masses did not spare the inner walls of the temples if they bore inscriptions containing the hated decrees.

Since revolt against unjust decrees began to flare up more often, a special armed force was constituted to guard the documents, titles and decisions (relating to the land) contained in the temple walls. This was called the Munrukai Mahasenai (or the Great Three-Armed Force).

So folks, this is how “natural order of dharma” functioned in the Chola kingdom. All talk of any "natural order" is a mere hoax. Smritis are man made laws designed to oppress the labour class and benefit select classes. What gets apparent is the case of the pot stealing the kettle and then calling it black. That is, oppressing men, taking away their lands, relegating the shudra to just one occupation (that is, service to dwijas) and on top of it, characterizing shudras as evil people / those with bad characteristics (as the smritis do).

It should not be a surprise why "low castes" are afraid of hindutva. In their minds it still evokes the brahmanical-hinduism model of suppression.

By giving slavery a religious twist, all that was achieved is a “holy decree” that slaves must remain slaves. If they tried to assert their right by taking a position equal to brahmins / dvijas in conversation, or even in sitting, they can be flogged or have a limb cut off.

The class of artisans who got treated (and perhaps also got downgraded in this period) as shudras had to fight for their rights. So did everyone else who were not in the privileged sections.

The greatest beneficieries during the chola kingdom were the combined class of brahmins and vellalars (but did these veerakudi ?? (valorous) vellalars become brahmins later is a subject i shall leave you to wonder about yourselves -- quite apparently there is a difference between the old class and new class of vellalars).

But what is sincerely expected out of these posts is for you to think over - what divinity is there in all this?

 

[subbudu1]

Happy Hindu, lot of interesting information. The cholas may be related to Andhra. I have a problem with Baudhayana being from Andhra since there does not seem to be any existing tradition of that name in Andhra today , whereas it was known to exist in TN and previously known to exist in Kashmir.

In another context you have mentioned that chozhiars, brahacharanam and gurukkal were munkudumi. The last two are not munkudumi neither do they have any tradition of having such a sikha at any point of time. It may be true that gurukkal were the teachers of cholas but they were considered adi-saiva brahmins and not as vaidikas. The vaidikas were represented by choziars and brahacharanam and the vadaman during the chola rule. You might wonder if vadamas existed during chola time. May be not in its early phase but certainly possible by 1000 AD. It is believed that Ramanujacharya was a vadaman as per Sri Vaishnava chronicles. The vadama sects that we may be talking about are the choladesha, sabhayar and so on. It is the vadadesha who were possibly the late comers but they are seen since probably the 13-14 century.

Gurukkals were mostly in North Tamil nad and later tanjore and much later all regions of TamilNad. One must be clear about this because all the branches of gurukkals are located around kanchipuram district. Since in the early stage , the gurukkal part-ancestors came from North, some believe Kashmir, they intermarried and built a home grown class of priests, they quite often considered themselves vadamas. Though this was rejected by the people known today as vadamas this perception within the gurukkal themselves did exist. It is seen in the wikipedia entry for Gurukkal. Though people tend to have inflated opinions about themselves one cannot delink the connection with Kashmiri Saivism and Baudhayana. In my view the Gurukkal are probably a mixed people , the system of worship set in place by an initial group of Kashmiri saivism inspired lot.

The choziars were exactly the remnants of chola times. The native brahmins in that regions might have collectively been known as choziars. They were not only vaishnavas but they were also saviaites. One saivaite branch is today the trustee of the chidambaram temple.

The southern parts of Tamilnad were probably less brahminized but later occupied by the others.
The Brahacharanam had already occupied the coimbatore, tiruchy and madurai belts. The vadamas were the new comers in the tanjore belt at that time.

One must be clear with these differences and the different layers of immigration and assimilation

Regards

 

[sarang]

It is believed that Ramanujacharya was a vadaman as per Sri Vaishnava chronicles.

Will appreciate any reference that points to this belief. Thanks in advance.

 

[sangom]

Series on Slavery: Part 3c

This is on land holdings under the Cholas in Tamilakam from 871 AD to 1279 AD. These notes are taken from 2 sources

[1] MD Rajukumar. Struggles for Rights during Later Chola Period. Social Scientist, Vol. 2, No. 6/7 (Jan. - Feb., 1974), pp. 29-35.

[2] Institute of Social Anthropology, University of Oxford (2007). Contributions to Indian sociology, Volume 40, Issues 1-2, p.98

Land grants under Cholas were of 3 kinds

1) Devadanam land: belonged to temples
2) Brahmadeya land: belonged to Brahmins
3) Velan Vagai: belonged to Vellalars
4) Jeevitha land: land given as grants to various officials, including dancing girls, and soldiers, for a living.

Of all these only the Devadanam and Brahmadeya were Irayili, or tax-free land everywhere. But in some places, Jeevitha land and belonging to certain individuals were exempt from taxes.

The Parayans were agricultural slaves in the Chola domains. Couple of things to note are:

1) The drum which was a symbol of bravery, celebration and nagaramai (civilization) became a symbol of pollution under the Chola Kingdom.

2) Suppression of Parayas / Pallans either started during the chola period or was in full swing in the Chola Kingdom.

Brahmins and Velalala landlords were vested with hegemony and authority in the feudal system. Several revolts burst out in opposition to tax burdens and in pursuit of the rights of sections of the people.

Tax-free land (Devadanams and Brahmadeyams) was considerable and expanded over time. Hence, small cultivators and other sections of the people had to bear an increasingly punishing tax burden.

Inscriptions provide evidence of
a) movements refusing to pay taxes;
b) movements for the reduction of taxes;
c) campaigns in opposition to certain taxes;
d) campaigns of cultivators themselves fixing the tax rate
e) movements for better wages

Several inscriptions suggest that the movement for the reduction of taxes was conducted with militancy. Farmers refused to sow until the objectionable taxes were lowered. They took shelter in other villages and refused to enter their own villages until the taxes were lowered.

Brahmin and Velala landlords had their lands cultivated by Parayas. In the case of Brahmin landlords who "did not have even the semblance of direct connection with the cultivation of the land, their role as parasites was directly and immediately identifiable" (exactly paraphrased from the article of Rajukumar that incidentally was translated into english by N.Ram).

In the Ur and Sabhai, the dominance of the Brahmins and Velalas prevailed. Apart from the king and the governors, the Ur and the Sabhai were vested with the authority to levy taxes. Landless agricultural labourers were denied a place in these organizations. They had no voice except agitate thru revolts.

Brahmin and Velala landlords, with official connivance, were known to tamper with and transformed the title deeds. They exploited their hegemony in the Ur, Sabhai and Koyilsabhai, and destroyed existing title deeds and documents and cooked up documents in their own favour. Thus they transformed cultivation rights, raising their own share of the produce and defrauded small cultivators. The toiling people of the 'right hand' and 'left hand' united in an assembly called to oppose this practice and decided not to help or co-operate in any way with Brahmin and Velala landlords and officials.

An instance is mentioned where Parayars demanded higher wages, the landlords refused. The veterans of the Ur and the Sabhai expected to crush the fighting people by repression, but failed to do so. With the struggle progressing to a stage where blood was shed, the demand was conceded.

Several struggles erupted over time against the oppression of the Brahmin and Velala landlords. Parayars also started a movement for ownership of land.

The Ukkal inscription of the Chingleput region tells us that the Kammalars (which refer to five categories of artisans: carpenters, blacksmiths, metal workers, goldsmiths and stone workers) fought against the monopoly of privileges in the hands of Brahmins and Velalas. The Kammalars won the right
a) to blow the double conch
b) to beat the berigai and other drums,
c) to wear foot-wear
d) to plaster their houses with limestone.

An inscription found at Kiranur in the Madurai region refers to rights won by the Idaiyar (shepherds) in Cholanallur to
a) to put up walls and to plaster them,
b) to use palanquins on good occasions and biers on bad occasions
c) to beat uvacchu (drums) on good and bad occasions.

So what is seen is that people themselves had to initiate struggles at every opportunity to fight for social rights.

But in this great "natural order of dharma" there were 2 kinds of Brahmins – one was the class of Brahmins who dominated Ur and Sabhai, and another was the class who had to fight for their rights (my note - perhaps the latter were the gurukkals and chozhiyars who had nothing to do with militancy). So instances of Brahmins opposing Brahmins (the latter against the former) also existed.

One inscription tells us of the fine imposed on Kuvaniyan Sreekapatan, Sree Krishnan and Sreekapatan Periyandan for setting fire to the house of a Brahmin named Harinarayanan. A Brahmin immolated himself to express his protest against a temple management which had refused him a right in the temple.

It was the practice to record in temple inscriptions the details of who owned and who cultivated the land, as well as the decisions of the Ur, Sabhai and Koyilsabhai. From this it is understood why temples were involved in the struggle for land rights.

The ordinary cultivators conducted many struggles against the alienation of the lands cultivated by them and against the conversion of these lands into Brahmadeya or Devadanam. When entire villages were converted into Brahmadeyas or Devadanams, cultivators were forcibly removed from their lands and settled elsewhere.

In some places, it was decreed that non-Brahmins must sell the lands they cultivated within Brahmin villages (Chaturvedi Mangalams). A Thiruvarur inscription mentions the eviction of those who cultivated temple lands and the allotment of these lands on lease to others. Another inscription tells us that the king decreed the replacement of cultivators-on-lease.

Sometimes cultivators broke down temple walls which bore inscriptions recording decrees and decisions alienating them from the lands they cultivated.

An inscription found at Tiruvarangam describes a struggle in the second year of the reign of Kulothunga I (1071-1122). An entire village known as Rajamahendra Chaturvedimangalam was burnt down; sites of pilgrimage were destroyed. Even the heart of the temple was razed to the ground. So it means enraged masses did not spare the inner walls of the temples if they bore inscriptions containing the hated decrees.

Since revolt against unjust decrees began to flare up more often, a special armed force was constituted to guard the documents, titles and decisions (relating to the land) contained in the temple walls. This was called the Munrukai Mahasenai (or the Great Three-Armed Force).

So folks, this is how “natural order of dharma” functioned in the Chola kingdom. All talk of any "natural order" is a mere hoax. Smritis are man made laws designed to oppress the labour class and benefit select classes. What gets apparent is the case of the pot stealing the kettle and then calling it black. That is, oppressing men, taking away their lands, relegating the shudra to just one occupation (that is, service to dwijas) and on top of it, characterizing shudras as evil people / those with bad characteristics (as the smritis do).

It should not be a surprise why "low castes" are afraid of hindutva. In their minds it still evokes the brahmanical-hinduism model of suppression.

By giving slavery a religious twist, all that was achieved is a “holy decree” that slaves must remain slaves. If they tried to assert their right by taking a position equal to brahmins / dvijas in conversation, or even in sitting, they can be flogged or have a limb cut off.

The class of artisans who got treated (and perhaps also got downgraded in this period) as shudras had to fight for their rights. So did everyone else who were not in the privileged sections.

The greatest beneficieries during the chola kingdom were the combined class of brahmins and vellalars (but did these veerakudi ?? (valorous) vellalars become brahmins later is a subject i shall leave you to wonder about yourselves -- quite apparently there is a difference between the old class and new class of vellalars).

But what is sincerely expected out of these posts is for you to think over - what divinity is there in all this?

Smt. HH,

If Devadaanam and Brahmadeyam lands were tax-free where was the need for brahmins, Ur and sabhai to levy taxes? This point has not come out clearly enough in your otherwise excellent write-up.

 

[subbudu1]

Will appreciate any reference that points to this belief. Thanks in advance.

Will the below link be sufficient?
Sri Ramanujacharya Life History

 

[happyhindu]

Happy Hindu, lot of interesting information. The cholas may be related to Andhra. I have a problem with Baudhayana being from Andhra since there does not seem to be any existing tradition of that name in Andhra today , whereas it was known to exist in TN and previously known to exist in Kashmir.

Dear Sir,

Georg Buhler says

"It must not be forgotten that most of the best MSS of Baudhayana's Sutras are found in Southern India. There are also some faint indications that the Andhra country is the particular district to which Baudhayana belonged".

Perhaps Buhler felt so because Baudhaya, the first sutrakara of the Taittiriyas, used the Andhra version of Aranyaka as is explained here - http://www.hinduwebsite.com/sacredscripts/hinduism/dharma/bau_intro.asp

Some views on Baudhayana here for northie origin (Ref page 153).

In another context you have mentioned that chozhiars, brahacharanam and gurukkal were munkudumi. The last two are not munkudumi neither do they have any tradition of having such a sikha at any point of time. It may be true that gurukkal were the teachers of cholas but they were considered adi-saiva brahmins and not as vaidikas. The vaidikas were represented by choziars and brahacharanam and the vadaman during the chola rule.

Sadasivan says Brahacharanam used the munkudumi or purna shikha (Ref page 232). The Shivacharyas (Gurukkals) were infact represented by the munkudimi they wore (Ref page 30). I also read somewhere that the mun-kudimi represents the linga on the head.

Apparently mun-kudimi brahmins were present in so large numbers in the Chola country that the purva shikha was dubbed "soliya" (Ref p.40). Rasanayagam says mun kudumi used to be an observed practice in ceylon, especially in jaffna.

Mun kudumi was also common amongst Kolli communy. Am not suprised really, since i feel the Matsya Virat Kingdom folks moved southwards as the Pandyas who also carried fish in their flag.

From the puranic view Pulinda and Mutiba (sons of Vishwamitra) colonized the areas formerly ruled by Bali in eastern India.

From Mahabharat, we understand that Virat, the King of Matsya is said to be the son of Bana and grandson of Bali, having descended from Hiranya, son of Kashyapa.

The subjects of Virata’s kingdom were called Kiratas. The Kiratas under the name of Varmas and Brahmas ruled in Nepal / Eastern India.

The Bana Kiratas were destroyed by Vrishnis / Krishna in Sonitpura / Kamarupa. Thereafter, Virat resided in Bengal.

After Vishwamitra’s sons colonized eastern India possibly the sibling faction of Andhra, Pandya, Karnata, Chola and Kerala moved down south.

This is possibly why we have genetics giving old connections. Probably the Mahisya, Vagdi and southern-indians (so did Ceylones Tamils and Sinhalese) shared ancient connections. The south-indians are estimated to have the maximum input from eastern India and vice-versa. (please click here for Northern India inputs).

You might wonder if vadamas existed during chola time. May be not in its early phase but certainly possible by 1000 AD. It is believed that Ramanujacharya was a vadaman as per Sri Vaishnava chronicles. The vadama sects that we may be talking about are the choladesha, sabhayar and so on. It is the vadadesha who were possibly the late comers but they are seen since probably the 13-14 century.

I do not know about the vadamas in the chola country sir. Never come across evidence of the same so far.

From what i understand so far, vadukku or vada desha is the northern borders of tamilkam that is the andhra-karnata country. Is that true? If so, would vada desa would be this region ?? Please do share if you know of this from tamil or other sources.

I also do not know the basis on which Swami Ramanuja's hagiography is presented as being one from a vadama family. I hope Nara sir put forth info from actual SV sources.

Gurukkals were mostly in North Tamil nad and later tanjore and much later all regions of TamilNad. One must be clear about this because all the branches of gurukkals are located around kanchipuram district. Since in the early stage , the gurukkal part-ancestors came from North, some believe Kashmir, they intermarried and built a home grown class of priests, they quite often considered themselves vadamas. Though this was rejected by the people known today as vadamas this perception within the gurukkal themselves did exist. It is seen in the wikipedia entry for Gurukkal. Though people tend to have inflated opinions about themselves one cannot delink the connection with Kashmiri Saivism and Baudhayana. In my view the Gurukkal are probably a mixed people , the system of worship set in place by an initial group of Kashmiri saivism inspired lot.

Sir, imo, people have been moving in both directions from north to south as well as from south to north. The deccan chalukyas went from south and colonized Gujarat, just as the Cholas colonized east-india.

Kashmiri Shaivism sharing links with Shaiva Siddhanta should not be a surprise, i feel. If there are connections between Gurukkals and Kashmiris, it can naturally be expected due to common faith and philosophy.

The choziars were exactly the remnants of chola times. The native brahmins in that regions might have collectively been known as choziars. They were not only vaishnavas but they were also saviaites. One saivaite branch is today the trustee of the chidambaram temple.

The southern parts of Tamilnad were probably less brahminized but later occupied by the others.
The Brahacharanam had already occupied the coimbatore, tiruchy and madurai belts. The vadamas were the new comers in the tanjore belt at that time.

One must be clear with these differences and the different layers of immigration and assimilation

Regards

Thanks sir.

 

[happyhindu]

Smt. HH,

If Devadaanam and Brahmadeyam lands were tax-free where was the need for brahmins, Ur and sabhai to levy taxes? This point has not come out clearly enough in your otherwise excellent write-up.

Dear Sir,

Since tax-free land associated with temples and brahmins kept expanding, all the other lands (and peasants) were burdened with increasing taxes to support the state. Hence the peasents kept revolting against high taxes. They also opposed the system of alienating them / evicting them from the land they cultivated just because their land was converted into chaturvedi mangalams.

Here one must note that even in chola times there were 2 classes of brahmins -
1) the politcally powerful rich brahmins of the ur, sabhai and koyilsabhai (who these were i dunno, but i would harazard a guess that they were the 'brahmin' army commanders, homam specialists and large land-owners); and
2) the poor brahmins (who i feel were the ordinary temple priests).

Quite apparently the rich did not benefit the poor; and the poor had to fight for their rights. Life is strange isn't it sir....

Regards.

 

[subbudu1]

Dear Sir,


Sadasivan says Brahacharanam used the munkudumi or purna shikha (Ref page 232). The Shivacharyas (Gurukkals) were infact represented by the munkudimi they wore (Ref page 30). I also read somewhere that the mun-kudimi represents the linga on the head.

Apparently mun-kudimi brahmins were present in so large numbers in the Chola country that the purva shikha was dubbed "soliya" (Ref p.40). Rasanayagam

Happy does he really say that? Page 232 in the book you quote says that Tamil Smartha Brahmins have their broad divisions according to religious merit , or adopted symbols and signs such as top knot or assigned duties like brahacharanam , chozhia or dikshitha. The line is not very clear or explicit?Is there a specific reference to them with a purva shikha in a reference or in a portrait or as in real folklore. Because the portrait of brahacharanams I have seen who lived more than 100 years back have the normal kudumi. Some senior members in my wife's family actually sport the normal kudumi. I could be wrong but I am not seeing any physical or material evidence on this.

I do not know about the vadamas in the chola country sir. Never come across evidence of the same so far.

The choladesha vadamas were aware of the difference between themselves and vadadeshas. I am told that they arrived there during the reign of the great cholas. My reference to Ramanujacharya was a SriVaishnava website which I have provided in reply to Saarang. There is a controversy as I have read in relation to the marriage of Ramanuja's relation to brahacharanam which was supposedly opposed by the vadama relations, but was finally done at the interference of Ramanuja. My understanding is that in the early stages of Sri-Vaishnavism subcaste divisions were still present until much later before the groups merged themselves into tenkalais and vadakalais. The process of vadama conversion to vaishnavism is a well known fact and documented as late as the 19 th century by Edgar Thurston. I think he talks about Thummagunta Dravidas in that context.

 

[subbudu1]

From what i understand so far, vadukku or vada desha is the northern borders of tamilkam that is the andhra-karnata country. Is that true? If so, would vada desa would be this region ?? Please do share if you know of this from tamil or other sources.

I assume you are aware of the difference between vadama and vad -desha or also known as vada-nadu.
The former is the subcaste and the later is a further classification.
It is as I understand that those immigrants who came to the tamil nad including southern andhra from the north from near the narmada, came to be called Vadamas. Different subsecta exist of which I am aware of Chola-desham and vada-desham. Today these subsects are spread throughout tamilnad with the exception of North Arcot. If a person is a native vadama from north arcot he is unlikely to be a choladeshan. You can look at him have an assessment of his features from top to bottom and say hey caught you - you are a vadadesha vadama. Chola deshams appear more grounded in tamil-culture and if he was from tanjore he would have been singing praises of the glory of the chola times. But for 2-3 generations in most of tamil nad you will not find a pure species of either subcaste. However in Northern most Tamil Nad you will find pure species if they had been marrying people only from that place.

There were supposed to be other subsects among vadamas , but I am practically unaware of them. They might have just dissolved with the others.
Based on this information and folklores what I understand is that these people who came from areas surrounding the narmada and probably a few other places like kashi many centuries back atleast 700 years in my reckoning, during the rule of Vijayanagar kings, were the vadadesha vadamas. They settled in North arcot, chengelput, Kanchipuram etc and soon moved elsewhere.It is this group that is intimately linked with the Nayakas and their prosperity owes to the Nyaaka rulers who patronized them as a pet group. An indication that these folks marched along with the Nayakas to TamilNad.

The Choladesha vadamas and I have heard sabhayars have probably a deeper history in tamilnad. Are some vadamas from Andhra or Karnataka. May be, but I wouldnt think that would earn them the title vadama. There dont seem to be any family legends that put their residence any further than south Andhra bordering TamilNad. Their migration stories more align with Maharashtra,MP and other such places. But really there is no hard evidence behind all this. Your guess is as good as mine. More later..

 

[happyhindu]

Happy does he really say that? Page 232 in the book you quote says that Tamil Smartha Brahmins have their broad divisions according to religious merit , or adopted symbols and signs such as top knot or assigned duties like brahacharanam , chozhia or dikshitha. The line is not very clear or explicit?Is there a specific reference to them with a purva shikha in a reference or in a portrait or as in real folklore. Because the portrait of brahacharanams I have seen who lived more than 100 years back have the normal kudumi. Some senior members in my wife's family actually sport the normal kudumi. I could be wrong but I am not seeing any physical or material evidence on this.

Yes, Sadasivan's sentence is left wanting and is not clear. Am not keen on going by present circumstances though, because i hear even choliyars wear pin-kudumi now.

Unfortunately i suppose there is no sufficient documentation; or maybe we are not looking in the right places for info.

From places like yahoo groups, i understand all earlier brahmins were the mun-kudimi (purva shikha) group. And the later brahmins who arrived in tamilakam were the pin kudimi (apara shikha group). Brahacharanam being in between these 2, perhaps took on the characteristics of both ??

Hope Sangom sir can throw some light on this...

The choladesha vadamas were aware of the difference between themselves and vadadeshas. I am told that they arrived there during the reign of the great cholas. My reference to Ramanujacharya was a SriVaishnava website which I have provided in reply to Saarang. There is a controversy as I have read in relation to the marriage of Ramanuja's relation to brahacharanam which was supposedly opposed by the vadama relations, but was finally done at the interference of Ramanuja. My understanding is that in the early stages of Sri-Vaishnavism subcaste divisions were still present until much later before the groups merged themselves into tenkalais and vadakalais. The process of vadama conversion to vaishnavism is a well known fact and documented as late as the 19 th century by Edgar Thurston. I think he talks about Thummagunta Dravidas in that context.

Thankyou sir...but i think choladesa vadama are simply vadamas who setled in chola desa. They are not vadamas who arrived during the Chola period into Tamilakam. I have not come across any evidence of vadamas living in tamilkam during the chola period.

Reg Ramanuja Swami, am hoping Nara sir can clarify from appropriate SV sources....

 

[happyhindu]

I assume you are aware of the difference between vadama and vad -desha or also known as vada-nadu.
The former is the subcaste and the later is a further classification.
It is as I understand that those immigrants who came to the tamil nad including southern andhra from the north from near the narmada, came to be called Vadamas. Different subsecta exist of which I am aware of Chola-desham and vada-desham. Today these subsects are spread throughout tamilnad with the exception of North Arcot. If a person is a native vadama from north arcot he is unlikely to be a choladeshan. You can look at him have an assessment of his features from top to bottom and say hey caught you - you are a vadadesha vadama. Chola deshams appear more grounded in tamil-culture and if he was from tanjore he would have been singing praises of the glory of the chola times. But for 2-3 generations in most of tamil nad you will not find a pure species of either subcaste. However in Northern most Tamil Nad you will find pure species if they had been marrying people only from that place.

[...]

But really there is no hard evidence behind all this. Your guess is as good as mine. More later..

I agree with the lack of evidence..

Vadama indicates one from anywhere north of tamilakam, i suppose (am not comfortable basing things on present-day facial features though). Its very much possible that a group came from Narmada, but now i have a doubt, how can the mere presence of narmada in some verses indicate that the person's ancestors came from narmada? what if the verses were adopted ones...Same for claims made by some NB groups, what if their Narmada indicative songs were adopted ones (i mean during the process of sanskritisation)..

Hard to tell i suppose...

The best guess perhaps is that people have always been moving, so anything cud be possible...

 

[subbudu1]

I agree with the lack of evidence..

Vadama indicates one from anywhere north of tamilakam, i suppose (am not comfortable basing things on present-day facial features though). Its very much possible that a group came from Narmada, but now i have a doubt, how can the mere presence of narmada in some verses indicate that the person's ancestors came from narmada? what if the verses were adopted ones...Same for claims made by some NB groups, what if their Narmada indicative songs were adopted ones (i mean during the process of sanskritisation)..

Hard to tell i suppose...

The best guess perhaps is that people have always been moving, so anything cud be possible...

The mere presence of Naramada cannot be taken as an evidence. But these folklore keep repeating. My grandfather made it an important point to take bath at Godavari river near Nasik. He is said to carry it forward as a family tradition. The specific folklore is that they were worshippers of Shiva near Trayamabakeshwar. So I did a check on that place, and found even today the same vedic recension is taught in trimabakeshwar and the place continued to be resided by some dikshiths. Not sure if it means much. There are a few such legends. When I first heard that some villagers in TN claimed to be from Kashi I dismissed the thought by recently B.Krishnamurthy here produced a reference to the work of Kashi Sesha Sastri's descendants.

Regarding Choladesha and Vadadesha they seem to have quite a few differences , some say physical, but many differences relate to ritual. I found an interesting question addressed in Namboothiri website on why their sanyasis prefer vadadesa vadama for taking alms. The answer seemed to indicate that it had to be with a very important ritual aspect which was different between the vadadesha and others. All this might just be as a consequence of settlement in different regions, but one needs to cross check them I would think. Hardly possible in this day and age when very few even know the group, at this level of detail , that they belong to.

 

[rishikesan]

dEAR fRIENDS, rESERVATION ISSUE, AS all of us know is like this :-Though Mandal Commission won 27 % reservation , T.N. is applying total 69% . The Supreme court had put a cap as 50 % years back. But who cares ? Writs are pending. Popular thinking is that, the creamy layer among Backward must be eliminated & allow the B.C. get legitimate full quota. Brahmins are not affected. Let us consider the case of T.N. Brahmins :- We fall into the category of O.C (other communities ) earlier known as F.C. ( not forward anymore )I would pose a pertinent Question in the present day situation? Are brahmin students affected in getting admission to Engg collegeges? Knowing our condition, we have found ways to get into Engg colleges in Private. I am sure the NRI brothers/ sisters & also retd parents ,put their retirement money for this, because it is considered as investment. Son / Daughter, by passing out in merit, will fly to U.S & there he is recd by his already M.S Brother/ Sister.

Let the readers appraise me cases of Brahmins, struggling for Money/ seats?
Then our breadhren in the younger lot will turn to help. You all should pool resources & channelyse to this deserving cases. Such unified co-operation would do away with disunity to an appreciable level.
A. Sinivasan (Rishikesan)
d

 

[subbudu1]

Though this topic might be unconnected with this subject, I want to make a single post only on this, so I post here and complete my stand on reservation, the subject of the origin of Sri Vaishnava brahmins fascinates me. I would beg to be corrected if experts like Nara find something intrinsically wrong with the information I have. None of it is of course original and I am relying entirely on statements /articles of Sri Vaishnavas.

From a genetic perspective there is no outstanding difference in the makeup of iyers and iyengars. Actually these terms were not very much used in earlier days.
Even more than a 1000 years there were strict divisions based on traditions and tribe. This has led to what we make call sub-castes and within these sect orientation towards vaishnava or advaita or saiva theology. In reality it was the former theology versus a loose friendshipbetween the advaitins and saivaites. Over a period the advaitin and saivaite divide in TN became inconsequential. Sri Vaishnavaites were excellant scholars and gave importance to lineage , and history. They seem to have documented a lot on their acharya vamsam which is a good thing from a historical POV.

To me 1000 years back the TB Community seemed to be a divided brahmana community based on popular subsects such as brahacharanam , chozhiar, ashtasahasram and so on. Some families subscribed to a rather strict vaishnavism. At that time Ramanujacharya a great reformer was born. 1000 years from his birth details about him are being debated. There is a view that he is a vadama. The source seems to be the works Periya Thrumudi Adaivu, Pazhanadai Vilakkam. Sri U,Ve Anbil Ramaswamy a Srivaishnava scholar makes this statement. Since I have not read this work , I can only use this as my source. I would request experts in this subject area to clarify this point. I am also quoting Mani Vardarajan from a discussion in ramanuja.org.

It is universally accepted that Ramanuja was a vaDama. So were Kurattalvan, Desika, Maamunigal and many other acharyas of our sampradAya. This can be seen in periya tirumuDi aDaivu, guru paramparA prabhAvam (GPP) and other traditional biographies where the 'kulam' of each acharya is given. Periya Nambi, for example, was a bRhaccaraNa brAhmaNa, and therefore had trouble getting his daughter (or some other relation, I forget exactly) married to a relative of Alvan. The details are in GPP. In those days, even within the Sri Vaishnava community, there were distinctions between groups of brahmins.

Similarly one can find the early sri-vaishnava acharyas from other communities as well such as Ashtasahasram and Choziar.

What this essentially means is that a strict demarcation of Iyer vs Iyengar did not exist then. But it is possible that lineages might have been still well divided as vaishnava or smartha families. However we must note that not even all smarthas were at one time worshippers of Shiva. There are many smartha homes especially among vadama who seldom wore vibhuti. Even the vibhuti used was directly obtained from burnt-cowdung but not from a siva temple. Over a period vibhuti became a general smartha practice.

This gives us to speculate the current subcaste nomenclature used must have been atleast a 1000 years old.

Even as late as the 19 th century it seems Thummagunta dravidas became Vaishnavas. It was an interesting episode which accelerated the growth of Vaishnavism in that area. Alliances were sought by the Vaishnavas among them with the smarthas only so far as it concerned accepting brides but brides were not exchanged with the smarthas.

In this period and to the present newer groups were amalgamated into the existing subsects.
This I think should be an area of study. The other interesting area of study is how the existing subsects originated. Though we have some little idea, we are lift clueless as there is no major records on this subject. But one thing we can be sure, just like a common identity between Iyengar and Iyer, there is common identity amongst all of us Indians and of course from a much bigger perspective -all of us Humans, only by digging deeper we will realize this. We recognize this but we fail to see the relation in day to day life.

In TamilNadu the entire reservation issue is also clouded by the anti-hindi or anti-north politics, not so much today, but very much in the fast. In a way I think it is a bit amusing because some of the Non Brahmins like Thondaimandala mudaliars, claim origin from the gangetic plain in the North. It is here we need to highlight that at a fundamental level there is unity among the different castes and subsects and from a wider perspective between North and the South.
After living for years on the other side of the Vindhyas, I am faced with a tinge of disappointment that this relation between the two sides of our country is not well recognized and people tend to be clannish even today. In a few urban centres these divides are slowly breaking down. A thondaimandala mudaliar fumed at his child's intercaste marriage with a person on the east side of the gangetic plain. For years the relationship was broken. May be things would have been easier had he recognized that after all it may have been a long lost community re-union?

I have made some statements on the reservation debate. Some of you might all be aware of my views. From a genetic perspective the identity of someone belonging to a community is only a temporary nomenclature to denote the path of a few ancestors through the times. We should remember that. There is a downtrodden today. There was a downtrodden yesterday. There need not be a one-one mapping between the two. If we look at this from such a wide perspective we will realize that reservations are to be marked against disadvantages not against communities which are just a temporary identity.

It is no doubt true that dalits as a community are in a bad state. What the supporters of reservation propose is that they should get that percentage of national life or opportunities , as they represent as a percentage in the population. This is where the idea of caste based reservation comes. It is looking at the small picture and assuming that community is really a long term identity. I would suggest to delink from this perspective. Look at disadvantages and list them down and select the best suitable from equally disadvantaged. We are otherwise going to preserve an unequal society forever.
I close my much repeated statements on this topic. Thank you.

 

[sangom]

Shri Subbudu,

The Indian society, or to put on a larger canvas, the entire society which some people still believe followed a so-called Sanatana Dharma (from the very beginning of time), had a tendency to coagulate or curdle — form into many small lumps. All these castes, sub-castes, etc. are the result of this phenomenon. Fortunately or unfortunately, there has not been any "churning" of this curdled society, imo. The result has been that there is rampant disunity in the entire society which was perhaps one of the factors which facilitated the very many foreign incursions into this land throughout history and many alien religions quickly creating a mass base here. (Though there is a tendency to take credit for the same as a sign of the hospitality of rulers and the broadmindedness of Hinduism.)

The existing reservation system has only indirect linkage to this situation; out of the very many caste- and sub-caste groups, slowly and slowly many got demoted to the lowest category of untouchables and other lower castes, and, all throughout these many thousands of years the tribal population remained largely untouched by the Sanatana Dharma and, some of the tribes got into kind of social interaction with the lowest sections and thus they mingled also with them through inter-marriages. The reservation as originally envisaged by the makers of our Constitution was for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes only. It got enlarged in the course of time because the Hindu society was one of high level of hierarchies and inequalities and many groups of people could (some of them at least, justifiably too) that they were deprived of social and economic equality in the hierarchical structure that prevailed in the traditional Indian society.

Now, of course, the Dalits who once upon a time converted to Xianity and Islam now claim that the caste structure and ostracization exist in the Xian and Islamic society and clamour for eligibility under the reserved quota and the Supreme Court proposes to have a fresh look into the issue.

The need for the forward castes of Hindus - this would apply to the hindutwa political parties also - is to find ways and means for consolidating the remaining hindu society as quickly, as effectively and as strongly as possible. If they remain smug in the feeling that this society will escape unruffled from the modern day onslaughts of Xianity and Islam, they will pay a very heavy price.

 

[rishikesan]

Dear Friends, I have read the above opinions. We all have knowledge on Reservation , the theory & history. However, in this forum,You would agree that we are all interested to find the disadvantages of reservation Policy formulated by the Center/ State Govt, as it affects our community. I always stress that,though apparently there is less unity , among us, let us not exaggerate. From early Fiftees, brahmin , intelligent boys (girls were not many ) could not get seats in Engg/ Medical just because he happens to be Brahmins .The D. K then ,followed by D.M.K, ensured victimising this community openly & succeeded up to one full generation, if not more.They became IAS & served in the State for its progress. After a few decades, starting late Eighties, advent of Computers & Soft- ware has catapulled the majority of Brahmins to seriously study Engineering courses, by getting the support of elders , including their brothers / Sister. Once the line was formed, the Boys & Girls ( by then, Girls were freely allowed to go for Higher studies, including Engg ? Software Etc.
No one can deny that majority of middle class brahmin families have grown to become RICH, because one Son or One daughter went for M.S. in U.S & got employed in top S/w companies , earning thousands of $ get married to girls of same status, buy big Flats & entertain their Parents & In=laws to a visit to U. S which they would havnever dreampt of.

Is it not the order of the day ? One may say that there are still poor Brahmins, devoid of such opportunities.

Let us form a forum with S/W giants among ourselves & let them come up with practicable solutions, to achieve the Goal . I request the Brahmins in this Forum start the ball rolling , . We all will Support.
I am a Retd Ordnance Factories Officer, living in Madras, currently in U.S. upto end of November. I will join, sooner I come to Madras.

A.Srinivasan ([email protected])

Rishikesan, in this forum

 

[happyhindu]

I have been asked “what is the difference between the caste system of the Sangam period (~ 200 BC - 200 AD) and that of the Chola kingdom”.

In Sangam literature (Tholkappiyam) we find the mention of Adiyor (slaves) and Vinaiyor (workers) or Kalamar (field labourers) in tamilakam. Sangam age poems mention the practice of chiefs granting Ur (land) to pana bards, to vedic sacrificial priests and to the marava tribal warlike bands.

Which ofcourse means that vedic sacrifical priests existed during that time (although i suspect they were followers of atharva-veda and offered worship to deities who were not mentioned in the rig, sama, yajur vedas). This case to me is bolstered by the native worship practices observed in tamilakam (do note - fire has been sacred since a long time. Primitive form of sacred fire rituals are even performed by srilankan Veddahs).

In tamilakam, there are some sangam literature accounts of how temporary shrines were built by the villagers, who cut and washed the stones with great ceremony, planted and decorated them with peacock feathers and offered worship there. The spirits of the martyrs were propitiated with offerings and gradually these hero stones (vira kal) were transformed into the guardian deities of the village.

But this situation was transformed.

I recommend the paper by MGS Narayanan, titled ‘The Role of Peasants in the Early History of Tamilakam in South India’, published in the Social Scientist, Vol. 16, No. 9 (Sep., 1988), pp. 17-34; for details about

(a) how the native society was influenced by waves of brahmin migrations, who according to the author came in search of cultivable land,

(b) how the monopoly of land power got shifted into the hands of brahmins in agricultural production centres,

(c ) how defenceless peasants were terrorized and subjugated by the armed bands, acting as agents of the chiefs of fortified palace, by carrying away (by force) cattle, girls, and agricultural produce.

(d) how brahmins competed with the panas in singing the praise of the chiefs (in legitimizing and glorifying the power of the chiefs), in binding the chiefs to dharmasastras by elevating them to dvijas; by transforming themselves into the new pana bards taking over the role of the traditional panas in the courts, and by gradually rising to the position of confidants, messengers and councillors of the Chiefs in due course.

Basically what we find is that

A) smrithis supported the feudal system [For more details refer: Sharad Patil, Problem of Slavery in Ancient India. Social Scientist, Vol. 1, No. 11 (Jun., 1973), pp. 32-48]

B) the Chola kingdom functioned very badly wrt wars and enslaved women (who were used as reproduction tools to create elite armies from velams) and enslaved men (whom they used for state development such as construction of dams).

C) ALL the landlords in the chola kingdom were Brahmins and Velalas (with very few / rare exceptions).

For an excellent overview of land-ownership in the Chola domains I recommend the paper by Dharma Kumar titled “Private Property in Asia? The Case of Medieval South India” published in Comparative Studies in Society and History, Vol. 27, No. 2 (Apr., 1985), pp. 340-366.

The paper also makes us understand the system how land was owned by the temple deity and “managed” on behalf of the deity by the temple trustees. Since temples were the major land-owners this ofcourse made brahmins socially powerful as land-“managers”. [i feel such a system has relevence to the Padmanabha Swamy temple case].

Also notable in the paper is that in Chola villages arable land was divided into shares, and the landholders were literally "shareholders" (pangukkarar). So the pangali was literally the shareholder of land. The pangali system thus (to me) seems rather ancient indeed.

D) agricultural slaves, that is the pallan / parayas, had to fight for their rights. Their livelihood depended on the land they tilled though they were bonded slaves. If the land was converted into chaturvedi mangalams, the slaves would not even get food to survive. My hunch is that such people may have ended up as robbers to survive.

Similarly sections like idaiyars (shepeherds), kammalars (artisans including the rathakara carpenter), had to fight for their rights (just to plaster houses, wear foot-wear, and such basic rights).

Basically it was a system of just 2 classes – Brahmins (warriors and priests) and Non-Brahmins (artisans and agricultural slaves). The burden of supporting the former class fell on the latter.

What we get is a Varna-system which made all attempts to subvert an existing caste-system, merely to self-benefit dvijas with a properly defined slave category; by use of force.

And ofcourse there was nothing divine, nothing called “natural order”, nothing intellectual and nothing valorous in this. IMO, those who involved in this were pseudo-brahmins and pseudo-kshatriyas, who merely suppressed fellow indians in the name of “divine laws’.

We will now come to land ownership in colonial India.

Let us see “what is freedom of labour”. Max Weber, defined that wage labour was formally free under two conditions:

(a) if the worker could decide by himself to which employer he sold his labour power and

(b) if he was at the same time 'free', i.e. detached from the means of production. [This is to say that he was not a bonded laborer to inhuman conditions of work]

(to be contd..)

 

[subbudu1]

Shri Subbudu,

The Indian society, or to put on a larger canvas, the entire society which some people still believe followed a so-called Sanatana Dharma (from the very beginning of time), had a tendency to coagulate or curdle — form into many small lumps. All these castes, sub-castes, etc. are the result of this phenomenon. Fortunately or unfortunately, there has not been any "churning" of this curdled society, imo. The result has been that there is rampant disunity in the entire society which was perhaps one of the factors which facilitated the very many foreign incursions into this land throughout history and many alien religions quickly creating a mass base here. (Though there is a tendency to take credit for the same as a sign of the hospitality of rulers and the broadmindedness of Hinduism.)

The existing reservation system has only indirect linkage to this situation; out of the very many caste- and sub-caste groups, slowly and slowly many got demoted to the lowest category of untouchables and other lower castes, and, all throughout these many thousands of years the tribal population remained largely untouched by the Sanatana Dharma and, some of the tribes got into kind of social interaction with the lowest sections and thus they mingled also with them through inter-marriages. The reservation as originally envisaged by the makers of our Constitution was for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes only. It got enlarged in the course of time because the Hindu society was one of high level of hierarchies and inequalities and many groups of people could (some of them at least, justifiably too) that they were deprived of social and economic equality in the hierarchical structure that prevailed in the traditional Indian society.

Now, of course, the Dalits who once upon a time converted to Xianity and Islam now claim that the caste structure and ostracization exist in the Xian and Islamic society and clamour for eligibility under the reserved quota and the Supreme Court proposes to have a fresh look into the issue.

The need for the forward castes of Hindus - this would apply to the hindutwa political parties also - is to find ways and means for consolidating the remaining hindu society as quickly, as effectively and as strongly as possible. If they remain smug in the feeling that this society will escape unruffled from the modern day onslaughts of Xianity and Islam, they will pay a very heavy price.

Dear Sangom while I accept your views I think we should not consider the onslaughts of islam and Xianity as something of a worry. Lot of things I feel depend on how entrenced hindus are in superstition. Only the person who believes in miracles of some swamiji, will be attracted to faith healing or some grandmother's tale spun by some foreigner. You are right in that if Indians come out of their narrow confines and also discard superstition then the other religions wont have an effect.

To be truthful deep within my heart I have this vision that all religions as we know today should cease to exist. May be people will worship god but there will be no separation. I think we can come to that point if we take a lead to get back to the fundamentals and find ways of worshipping together. We may still have differences but we should build platforms where people of all religions worship together and in the same way. Raghupathati raghav raja ram.., ishwar allah tero naam is not enough. We need people of all religions to be united under one banner. Mohammed I think had that vision for Arabs, but unfortunately I feel personally there were many drawbacks but the idea was correct. We should proceed on creating a common method of worship for all Indians/humans.

 

[happyhindu]

Series on Slavery: Part 4

In colonial India many labourers were hereditary serfs (this is a fact which strengthens the relationship between caste and occupation). But whether their status was precisely that of slaves (bonded laborers) or serfs (hired laborers) was initially not clear to the British administrators, although the fact of servitude was patent and noticeable. This attracted the attention of the anti-slavery movement in England, a pressure group so strong that it forced the administrators into submitting a series of reports on "slavery" in India.

The administrators did not find a simple system of self-sufficient peasants paying land revenue to the state. Instead they found a complex pattern of rights to ownership, occupation and shares in the produce of the land. These included

A) In the first place, the rights of the zamindars, who were originally revenue collectors under the Mughals, to a share of the land revenue payable to the state.

B) Secondly, another share of that revenue might be alienated to individuals for services rendered, or to institutions, notably to the temples.

C) Thirdly, there were varying degrees of private ownership, including the right to sell and mortgage land, and to evict tenants. These were vested in the janmis (Namboodiris) of Malabar, the mulawargadars of Kanara, and the mirasdars of the Tamil areas. Under them there might be occupancy tenants or tenants-at-will [1][2].

[1] For a detailed account of South Indian land tenures, see BH Baden-Powell, Land Systems of British India (1892), vol. III.
[2] S. Sundararaja Iyengar, Land Tenures in Madras Presidency (Madras, 1916).

It must be noted that the British altered the old systems of land tenures, by giving the zamindars ownership rights which they had not previously possessed. Anyways there were no more rajas, so the zamindars had no need to pay taxes to a Raja. Instead the zamindars now became “land-owners” under the British and paid taxes to the British government. In such way land-ownership became privatized. And this system legally recognized the janmis, mulawargadars and mirasdars as “land-owners”. However, estimating the number of slaves was no easy task.

Initially in the 1800s there were only two instances were recorded of landlords owning large numbers of slaves.

1) In 1799 a landowner in Chinglepet had 400 slaves; but he could employ only 100 of them, and the remainder worked for other landholders [Ref Place, Report on the Jaghir (Madras, n.d.), written in 1799, p. 75).

2) In 1835-36 it was reported that a landholder in Tinnevelly had 500 slaves, but apparently he also let them work for others, for want of sufficient land [Ref: Report of Indian Law Commissioners on Slavery (1841), p. 20].

Yet there were many farmers who had big land holdings which required between 5 to 50 serfs to till the land. The demand for labour was reinforced by the caste system, because Brahmins were not permitted to perform manual labour, and a significant proportion of the landowners were Brahmins. {more of this later}.

To estimate the numbers of landless labourers early in the nineteenth century, the administrators started working from caste data, on the assumption that members of certain castes were hereditary agricultural labourers. This assumption was strengthened because of the servile status of members of these castes, a status frequently approaching agrestic slavery.

Here came the difference between north india and south india. The south Indian slave was neither a freely marketable commodity nor a domestic slave owned by a master. Here the slave played a highly important part in production, but he enjoyed certain admitted rights, which accrued to him from his caste. Although this group as a whole lay at the bottom of the caste ladder, there were further gradations inside it, with each sub-group having its firmly articulated rights and disabilities.

It was these distinctions which baffled the British administrators. Faced with these groups, which were clearly in some degree or other of servitude, they fell back on ancient terms such as "allodial slave of the soil", "agricultural serf", "villein" or "adscriptus glebae". The result was a palimpsest of definitions, none of which fitted South Indian conditions.

So finally the rigour of servitude was examined based on regional settings divided as
A) West coast districts (Malabar and South Kanara),
B) Tamil districts (Tinnevelly, Madura, Trichinopoly, Coimbatore, Salem, Chinglepet, North and South Arcot),
C) Telugu and Northern districts (Bellary, Anantapur, Kurnool, Nellore, Cuddapah, Kistna, Godavari, Vizagapatam, and Ganjam).

It is to be noted that during the British period several large zamindars were muslims who had descended from the deccan sultans or muslim chieftains. Since slavery is permitted in Islam, they practiced the system of having ghoolams (slaves).

Reports were instituted, and questionnaires were prepared. The questions took into account food, shelter, clothing, degradation experienced, etc.

Slavery was legally abolished in 1837 in India. After that the first all-India census (of 1871) was undertaken. Work on this census took place from 1867 to 1872, and it was published in 1871-72. It is generally referred to as the 1871 census.

[...contd]..

 

[happyhindu]

Series on Slavery: Part 5

We shall explore slavery in southern india further in other posts. But first here are some excerpts from the article "A brief view of slavery in British India. Wilson Anti-Slavery Collection, (1841)".

The Hindoo law "treats the slave as the absolute property of his master, familiarly speaking of this property, in association with cattle, under the contemptuous designation of bipeds and quadrupeds. It makes no provision for the protection of the slave from the cruelty and ill treatment of an unfeeling master, nor defines the master's power over the person of his slave; neither prescribing distinct limits to that power, nor declaring it to extend to life or limb."

The Mahomedan law declares " the property (in slaves) is so absolute and complete, that it is assigned as a reason for subjecting an owner to no worldly punishment or penalty for the murder of his slave ; he has of course entire power over his person, being restrained by no provisions of law adapted to protect the slave from ill-treatment"

In Malabar, Canara, Coorg, Wynad, Cochin, and Travancore, there are 401,000 slaves, in Tinnevelly 324,000, in Trichinopoly 10,600, in Arcot 20,000, in Assam 11,300, in Surat 3,000, in Silhet and Buckergunge 80,000, in Behar 22,722, in Tirhoot 11,061, in the district lying between the rivers Kistna and Toongbutra 15,000, in the southern Mahratta country 7,500......Most of these are prandial slaves. Yet these form but a portion, perhaps a small portion of the mighty mass, scattered throughout the whole of British India, who claim the immediate attention and powerful aid of British abolitionists.

"Nothing can be more abject and wretched," says Mr. Baber, "than the condition of that degraded race of mortals, the slaves of Malabar, whose huts are little better than mere baskets, and whose diminutive stature and squalid appearance evidently show a leant of adequate nourishment.''

"The slave," says Mr. Grasme, in his report on Malabar, 1822, " in the interior, is a wretched, half- starved, diminutive creature, stinted in his food, and exposed to the inclemency of the weather ; whose state demands that commiseration and melioration which may confidently be expected from the humanity of the British government."

Mr. Campbell, in reply to the questions on slavery proposed by the Board of Control in 1832, states, "The creatures in human form who constitute the agrestic slave population of Malabar, being distinguishable, like the savage tribes still to be found in some of the forests of Arabia, from the rest of the human race, by their degraded, diminutive, squalid appearance, their dropsical pot bellies, contrasting horridly with their sleleton arms and legs, half-starved, hardly clothed, and in a condition scarcely superior to the cattle they follow at the plough."

They are "compelled," says Mr. Brown, "whenever they come in sight of a habitation, to fly from the public high road, and make a long circuit to avoid the remotest approach; forced to utter a cry, to give warning to others that a human being, not a dog, was coming; and driven, whenever their cry was answered, to hide themselves in the jungle."

From the evidence, and of persons of high reputation, in answer to queries submitted to them by the commissioners for the affairs of India in 1832, we learn that "husbands and wives are separated by sale to different parties" - "That they are sold off the estates where they were born and bred" - "And the nearest and dearest associations and ties of our common nature severed". - That they are sold " in satisfaction of revenue arrears," or, "when proprietors are in want of cash to pay the revenues" - That "slaves can be and are sold at pleasure" - That "the sale of agrestic slaves is common."

The effect of this is described by the Foujdaree Adawlut, one of the Law Courts, in an extract from its proceedings, dated 20th July, 1829 :-

"In Malabar, where the slave is often sold separately from the land, civilization is checked by the infraction of those feelings, the cultivation of which principally tends to raise human nature. He is dragged from the field which he is accustomed to till, from all the connexions of blood and affection, and his diminutive size, stinted growth, and squalid appearance, present the picture of the degraded being which he feels he is."

The Wilson Anti-Slavery Report ended with some of these concluding remarks (holding the East India Company incapable of abolishing slavery):

All the attempts made to ameliorate the condition of the slaves in British India up to 1833, when the charter of the East India Company was renewed, had proved vain. It was then that the government of Earl Grey introduced a clause into the charter bill providing for the complete abolition of slavery in British India, "on the 12th day of April, 1837," in the event of the Governor- General in Council not being able to effect it "previously" to that period.

This noble attempt of the Government to destroy the evil was resisted by the Court of Directors, and the pro-slavery party in both Houses of Parliament, especially in that of the Peers; and, after a clause making it mandatory on the authorities in India "to frame laws and regulations for the extinction of slavery" had passed the House of Commons, it was finally determined by the House of Lords, that they should be required only "to take into consideration the means of mitigating the state of slavery, and of ameliorating the condition of the slaves, and of extinguishing slavery throughout the said territories, so soon as such extinction shall be practicable and safe;" and the whole affair was handed over to the East India Company to be dealt with as they might think proper!

Year after year has rolled away without any measures having been taken even to mitigate the state of slavery, and to ameliorate the condition of the slaves!

(Please note this report was written about 4 years after Slavery was legally abolished)..

(to be contd..)

 

[Nara]

..... Only the person who believes in miracles of some swamiji, will be attracted to faith healing or some grandmother's tale spun by some foreigner. .....

Subbudu sir, this is the key, freeing the populace from superstitions is the best inoculation against conversions. EVR tried his best to make people think critically. He was bold enough to declare that his own words must be accepted only after a critical analysis and only to the extent it makes rational sense.

Unfortunately, the very same people who decry conversions vilify EVR as a monster, yet willingly nurture silly superstitions and blind reverence to godmen of all stripes.

Cheers!

 

[rishikesan]

Dear friends, Are we to discuss the past history on this topic or give importance to the current situation of reservation in Tamil Nadu. I wrote that the increase % of reservation , contrary to the ceiling of total reservation capped at 50 % is being allowed by the supreme court till final decision, which is taking more than a decade. Now, it has become a right to set it at 69 %.
I would like the enlightened readers review the current reservation policy of T. N. Govt and analyse hypothetically, the disadvantages faced by bright Brahmin students not getting the priority in admission to Engg. colleges in Govt Quota ? You have to also realize that despite the draw back, tamil Brahmin Boys / Girls seem to secure seats in colleges of their choice, by paying capitation fees? The parents 7 elders of such boys/ girls come to financial assistance initially, knowing fully well that he/she would go to America for M.S. with some scholarship/ aid and in 2 years, we practically see them rising high & save thousands of Dollers & get projected by Parents in the competitive Marriage Mkt , esp. for the girls, who earn more than their counter boys ?
There is no hope to improve the chance of higher reservation & let us continue with our aim to get the children educated to professional level & they would take care of everything of their parents, financially ,surely, Parents really need money for healthy life in their declining age, more than anything else. If the parents are fortunate, they would be visting a few times to America & boast themselves the life time chance given by their children in return,.
A peace ful life could be held, by spending time of your own, duly praying that your partner should continue to live with you , for as long as possible ? What else one would aspire for ?
I , now request the NRI T. N. Brahmins to start an unified forum to offer all the help to show the route & also muster financial assistance to the younger Brothers/ sisters awaiting to join you in the
next 4 years. Note :- You youngsters, please take-over & show that, YOU CAN DO IT-

A .Srinivasan

 

[happyhindu]

Dear friends, Are we to discuss the past history on this topic or give importance to the current situation of reservation in Tamil Nadu.

The present situation came about because of past history. It appears that some people do not want to hear about past history. Maybe it makes them squirm, makes them uncomfortable.

I wrote that the increase % of reservation , contrary to the ceiling of total reservation capped at 50 % is being allowed by the supreme court till final decision, which is taking more than a decade. Now, it has become a right to set it at 69 %.

Number of upper castes in tamilnadu are a miniscule proportion. Am told (off hand) about 3% are brahmins, and about 10 to 15% are other upper castes. So for about 18% of upper castes, giving 41% seats in open category is too much. Government should implement a study and raise reservations to around 80%; instead of the current 69%.

Why just a decade...reservations should be implemented for about ~600 years dating from the communal GO of 1927. That is because brahmins and other upper castes were on the top of the heap ever since vijayangar empire ruled, all the way until the colonial period. So the downtrodden were in that suppressed and oppressed position for ~600 years.

Once upon a time i was so bitter and against reservations, since i missed out on admissions due to reservations. But today i accept the realities of history...maybe its karma that what goes around comes around.

Getting admission is only one step. Completing it is a bigger task. God help dalits who get admitted into brahmanical enclaves -- Tehelka - The People's Paper

 

[கால பைரவன்]

The present situation came about because of past history.

The validity of this statement can be considered to transcend time. These type of arguments gives insight into how discrimination and oppressive methods that were in practice could have been justified in any given time period.

It appears that some people do not want to hear about past history. Maybe it makes them squirm, makes them uncomfortable.

There are all sorts of people.

Some people want to forget history.

Some people want to remember history, but only selectively.

Some people want to distort history.

The degree of conscience varies among people. A person who squirms can be considered to have at least a certain degree of conscience. Sadly, that cannot be said of persons who go to all extent possible to hide truths, speak partial truths, distort history - all with the sole purpose of pointing fingers at others and thereby absolving oneself.

 

[happyhindu]

The validity of this statement can be considered to transcend time. These type of arguments gives insight into how discrimination and oppressive methods that were in practice could have been justified in any given time period.



There are all sorts of people.

Some people want to forget history.

Some people want to remember history, but only selectively.

Some people want to distort history.

The degree of conscience varies among people. A person who squirms can be considered to have at least a certain degree of conscience. Sadly, that cannot be said of persons who go to all extent possible to hide truths, speak partial truths, distort history - all with the sole purpose of pointing fingers at others and thereby absolving oneself.

KB, say what you will. Everything is relative. It depends on the eyes and ears of the beholder how each one wishes to "like" it. Brahmins are not the only people who do not get reservations. Other communities also do not get reservations. Call it retribution, selective history, karma, vidhi, politics, anything...but such communities are not going to get reservations. And reservations are not going to go. That's the bottom line.