CASTES AND TRIBES OF SOUTHERN INDIA EDGAR THURSTON, C.I.E., Superintendent, Madras Government Museum ; Correspondant Etranger, Soci6t d'Anthropologie de Paris ; Socio Corrispondante, Societa Romana di Anthropologia.
ASSISTED BY K. RANGACHARI, M.A., of the Madras Government Museum.
Maravar jati Varnam-William Taylor(Mckenzi Manuscript)
ASSISTED BY K. RANGACHARI, M.A., of the Madras Government Museum.
.—“The Maravans,” Mr. H. A. Stuart writes,13 “are found chiefly in Madura and
Tinnevelly, where they occupy the tracts bordering on the coast from Cape
Comorin to the northern limits of the Rāmnād zemindari. The proprietors of that
estate, and of the great Sivaganga zemindari, are both of this caste. The
Maravars must have been one of the first of the Dravidian tribes that
penetrated to the south of the peninsula, and, like the Kallans, they have been
but little affected by Brāhmanical influence. There exists among them a
picturesque tradition to the effect that, in consequence of their assisting
Rāma in his war against the demon Rāvana, that deity gratefully exclaimed in [23]good Tamil Maravēn, or I will never forget, and
that they have ever since been called Maravans. But, with more probability, the
name may be connected with the word maram, which means killing, ferocity,
bravery and the like, as pointing clearly to their unpleasant profession, that
of robbing and slaying their neighbours. In former days they were a fierce and
turbulent race, famous for their military prowess. At one time they temporarily
held possession of the Pāndya kingdom, and, at a later date, their armies gave
valuable assistance to Tirumala Nayakkan. They gave the British much trouble at
the end of last (eighteenth) century and the beginning of this (nineteenth)
century, but they are now much the same as other ryots (cultivators), though
perhaps somewhat more bold and lawless. Agamudaiyan and Kallan are returned as
sub-divisions by a comparatively large number of persons. Maravan is also found
among the sub-divisions of Kallan, and there can be little doubt that there is
a very close connection between Kallans, Maravans, and Agamudaiyans.” This
connection is dealt with in the article on the Kallans. But I may here quote
the following legend relating thereto. “Once upon a time, Rishi Gautama left
his house to go abroad on business. Dēvendra, taking advantage of his absence,
debauched his wife, and three children were the result. When the Rishi
returned, one of the three hid himself behind a door, and, as he thus acted
like a thief, he was henceforward called Kallan. Another got up a tree, and was
therefore called Maravan from maram, a tree, whilst the third brazened it out,
and stood his ground, thus earning for himself the name of Ahamudeiyan, or the
possessor of pride. This name was corrupted into Ahambadiyan.”14[24]
“Some say the word
Maravan is derived from marani, sin; a Maravan being one who commits sin by
killing living creatures without feeling pity, and without fear of god.”15
The Maravans claim
descent from Guha or Kuha, Rāma’s boatman, who rowed him across to Ceylon.
According to the legend, Rāma promised Guha that he would come back at a fixed
time. When he failed to return, Guha made a fire, whereon to burn himself to
death. Hanumān, however, prevented him from committing suicide, and assured him
that Rāma would shortly return. This came to pass, and Rāma, on learning what
Guha had done, called him Maravan, a brave or reckless fellow. According to
another legend, the god Indra, having become enamoured of Ahalya, set out one
night to visit her in the form of a crow, and, seating himself outside the
dwelling of the Rishi her husband, cawed loudly. The Rishi believing that it
was dawn, went off to bathe, while Indra, assuming the form of her husband,
went in to the woman, and satisfied his desire. When her husband reached the
river, there were no signs of dawn, and he was much perturbed, but not for
long, as his supernatural knowledge revealed to him how he had been beguiled,
and he proceeded to curse Indra and his innocent wife. Indra was condemned to
have a thousand female organs of generation all over his body, and the woman
was turned into a stone. Indra repented, and the Rishi modified his
disfigurement by arranging that, to the onlooker, he would seem to be clothed
or covered with eyes, and the woman was allowed to resume her feminine form
when Rāma, in the course of his wanderings, should tread on her. The [25]result of Indra’s escapade was a son, who was
stowed away in a secret place (maravuidam). Hence his descendants are known as
Maravan.16
The head of the Maravans
is the Sētupati (lord of the bridge), or Rāja of Rāmnād. “The Sethupati line,
or Marava dynasty of Rāmnād,” the Rev. J. E. Tracy writes,17 “claims great antiquity.
According to popular legendary accounts, it had its rise in the time of the
great Rāma himself, who is said to have appointed, on his victorious return
from Lanka (Ceylon), seven guardians of the passage or bridge connecting Ceylon
with the mainland.... Another supposition places the rise of the family in the
second or third century B.C. It rests its case principally upon a statement in
the Mahāwanso, according to which the last of the three Tamil invasions of
Ceylon, which took place in the second or third century B.C., was under the
leadership of seven chieftains, who are supposed, owing to the silence of the
Pāndyan records on the subject of South Indian dealings with Ceylon, to have
been neither Chēras, Chōlas, or Pāndyans, but mere local adventurers, whose
territorial proximity and marauding ambition had tempted them to the
undertaking.... Another supposition places the rise of the family in the
eleventh or twelfth century A.D. There are two statements of this case,
differing according to the source from which they come. According to the one,
which has its source in South India, the rise of the family took place in or
about 1059 A.D., when Rāja Rāja, the Chōla king, upon his invasion of Ceylon,
appointed princes whom he knew to be loyal to himself, and who, according to
some, had aided him in his conquest of all Pāndya, to act as guardians of the[26]passage by which his armies must cross to and
fro, and supplies be received from the mainland. According to the other
statement, which has its source in Sinhalese records, the family took its rise
from the appointment of Parākrama Bahu’s General Lankapura, who, according to a
very trustworthy Sinhalese epitome of the Mahāwanso, after conquering Pandya,
remained some time at Ramespuram, building a temple there, and, while on the
island, struck kahapanas (coins similar to those of the Sinhalese series).
Whichever of those statements we may accept, the facts seem to point to the
rise of the family in the eleventh or twelfth century A.D., and inscriptions
quoted from Dr. Burgess by Mr. Robert Sewell18 show that grants were made by
Sethupati princes in 1414, again in 1489, still again in 1500, and finally as
late as 1540. These bring the line down to within two generations of the time
when Muttu Krishnappa Nayakka is said, in 1604, to have found affairs sadly
disordered in the Marava country, and to have re-established the old family in
the person of Sadaiyaka Tēvar Udaiyar Sethupati. The coins of the Sethupatis
divide themselves into an earlier and later series. The earlier series present
specimens which are usually larger and better executed, and correspond in weight
and appearance very nearly to the well-known coins of the Sinhalese series,
together with which they are often found, ‘These coins’ Rhys Davids writes,19 ‘are probably, the very ones
referred to as having been struck by Parākrama’s General Lankapura.’ The coins
of the later series are very rude in device and execution. The one face shows
only the Tamil legend of the word Sethupati, while the other side is taken up
with various devices.”[27]
A poet, in days of old,
refers to “the wrathful and furious Maravar, whose curled beards resemble the
twisted horns of the stag, the loud twang of whose powerful bowstrings, and the
stirring sound of whose double-headed drums, compel even kings at the head of
large armies to turn their back and fly.”20 The Maravans are further
described as follows. “Of strong limbs and hardy frames, and fierce looking as
tigers, wearing long and curled locks of hair, the blood-thirsty Maravans,
armed with the bow bound with leather, ever ready to injure others, shoot their
arrows at poor and defenceless travellers, from whom they can steal nothing,
only to feast their eyes on the quivering limbs of their victims.”21 In a note on the Maravans of the
Tinnevelly district, it is recorded22 that “to this class belonged most
of the Poligars, or feudal chieftains, who disputed with the English the
possession of Tinnevelly during the last, and first years of the present
(nineteenth) century. As feudal chiefs and heads of a numerous class of the
population, and one whose characteristics were eminently adapted for the roll
of followers of a turbulent chieftain, bold, active, enterprising, cunning and
capricious, this class constituted themselves, or were constituted by the
peaceful cultivators, their protectors in time of bloodshed and rapine, when no
central authority, capable of keeping the peace, existed. Hence arose the systems
of Dēsha and Stalum Kāval, or the guard of a tract of country comprising a
number of villages against open marauders in armed bands, and the guard of
separate villages, their houses and crops, against secret theft. The feudal
chief received a contribution from the area around his fort in [28]consideration of protection afforded against
armed invasion. The Maravars are chiefly the agricultural servants or
sub-tenants of the wealthier ryots, under whom they cultivate, receiving a
share of the crop. An increasing proportion of this caste are becoming the
ryotwari owners of land by purchase from the original holders.”
Though the Maravans, Mr,
Francis writes,23 “are usually cultivators, they
are some of them the most expert cattle-lifters in the Presidency. In Madura,
they have a particularly ingenious method of removing cattle. The actual thief
steals the bullocks at night, and drives them at a gallop for half a dozen
miles, hands them over to a confederate, and then returns and establishes an alibi.
The confederate takes them on another stage, and does the same. A third and a
fourth man keep them moving all that night. The next day they are hidden and
rested, and thereafter they are driven by easier stages to the hills north of
Madura, where their horns are cut and their brands altered, to prevent them
from being recognised. They are then often sold at the great Chittrai cattle
fair in Madura town. In some papers read in G.O., No. 535, Judicial, dated 29th
March 1899, it was shown that, though, according to the 1891 census, the
Maravans formed only 10 per cent. of the population of the district of
Tinnevelly, yet they had committed 70 per cent. of the dacoities which have
occurred in that district in the previous five years. They have recently (1899)
figured prominently in the anti-Shānār riots in the same district.” (See Shānān.)
“The Maravans”, Mr. F.
S. Mullaly writes,24 “furnish nearly the whole of the
village police (kāvilgars, watchmen), robbers and thieves of the Tinnevelly
district. [29]Very often the thief and the watchman are one
and the same individual. The Maravans of the present time, of course, retain
only a shadow of the power which their ancestors wielded under the poligars,
who commenced the kavil system. Still the Marava of to-day, as a member of a
caste which is numerous and influential, as a man of superior physique and bold
independent spirit, thief and robber, village policeman and detective
combined—is an immense power in the land.”
It is noted, in the
Madras Police Report, 1903, that “a large section of the population in
Tinnevelly—the Maravans—are criminal by predilection and training. Mr.
Longden’s efforts have been directed to the suppression of a bad old custom, by
which the police were in the habit of engaging the help of the Maravans
themselves in the detection of crime. The natural result was a mass of false
evidence and false charges, and, worst of all, a police indebted to the
Maravan, who was certain to have his quid pro quo. This method
being discountenanced, and the station-house officer being deprived of the aid
of his tuppans (men who provide a clue), the former has found himself very much
at sea, and, until sounder methods can be inculcated, will fail to show
successful results. Still, even a failure to detect is better than a police in
the hands of the Maravans.” Further information concerning tuppukuli, or clue
hire, will be found in the note on Kallans.
From a very interesting
note on the Maravans of the Tinnevelly district, the following extract is
taken.25 “On the principle of setting a
thief, to catch a thief, Maravars are paid blackmail to keep their hands from
picking and stealing, and to make restitution for any thefts that may [30]possibly take place, notwithstanding the
vigilance of the watchmen. (A suit has been known to be instituted, in a
Munsiff’s Court, for failure to make restitution for theft after receipt of the
kudikāval money.) As a matter of fact, no robberies on a large scale can
possibly take place without the knowledge, connivance, or actual co-operation
of the Kavalgars. People living in country places, remote from towns, are entirely
at the mercy of the Maravars, and every householder or occupier of a mud hut,
which is dignified by being called a house, must pay the Maravars half a fanam,
which is equal to one anna eight pies, yearly. Those who own cattle, and there
are few who do not, must pay one fanam a year. At the time of the harvest, it
is the custom in Southern India for an enemy to go and reap his antagonist’s
crops as they are growing in the fields. He does this to bring matters to a
climax, and to get the right side of his enemy, so that he may be forced to
come to terms, reasonable or otherwise. Possession is nine points of the law.
On occasions such as these, which are frequent, the advantage of the employment
of Kavalgars can readily be understood. The Maravars are often true to their
salt, though sometimes their services can be obtained by the highest bidder.
The plan of keeping kaval, or going the rounds like a policeman on duty, is,
for a village of, say, a hundred Maravars, to divide into ten sections. Each
section takes a particular duty, and they are paid by the people living within
their range. If a robbery takes place, and the value of the property does not
exceed ten rupees, then this section of ten men will each subscribe one rupee,
and pay up ten rupees. If, however, the property lost exceeds the sum of ten
rupees, then all the ten sections of Maravars, the hundred men, will join
together, and make restitution for the robbery. How [31]they are able to do this, and to recoup
themselves, can be imagined. Various attempts for many years have been made to
put a stop to this system of kudi-kaval. At one time the village (Nunguneri) of
the chief Maravar was burnt down, and for many years the police have been on
their track, and numerous convictions are constantly taking place. Out of
150,000 Maravars in the whole district, 10,000 are professional thieves, and of
these 4,000 have been convicted, and are living at the present time. The question
arises whether some plan could not be devised to make honest men of these
rogues. It has been suggested that their occupation as watchmen should be
recognised by Government, and that they should be enlisted as subordinate
officials, just as some of them are now employed as Talayaris.... The villages
of the Maravars exist side by side with the other castes, and, as boys and
girls, all the different classes grow up together, so that there is a bond of
sympathy and regard between them all. The Maravans, therefore, are not regarded
as marauding thieves by the other classes. Their position in the community as
Kavalgars is recognised, and no one actually fears them. From time immemorial
it has been the mamool (custom) to pay them certain dues, and, although
illegal, who in India is prepared to act contrary to custom? The small sum paid
annually by the villagers is insignificant, and no one considers it a hardship
to pay it, when he knows that his goods are in safety; and, if the Maravars did
not steal, there are plenty of other roving castes (e.g., the Kuluvars,
Kuravars, and Kambalatars) who would, so that, on the whole, ordinary
unsophisticated natives, who dwell in the country side, rather like the Maravar
than otherwise. When, however, these watchmen undertake torchlight [32]dacoities, and attack travellers on the
high-road, then they are no better than the professional thieves of other
countries, and they deserve as little consideration. It must be borne in mind
that, while robbery is the hereditary occupation of the Maravars, there are
thousands of them who lead strictly honest, upright lives as husbandmen, and
who receive no benefit whatever from the kudi-kaval system. Some of the most
noted and earnest Native Christians have been, and still are, men and women of
this caste, and the reason seems to be that they never do things by halves. If
they are murderers and robbers, nothing daunts them, and, on the other hand, if
they are honest men, they are the salt of the earth.” I am informed that, when
a Maravan takes food in the house of a stranger, he will sometimes take a pinch
of earth, and put it on the food before he commences his meal. This act frees
him from the obligation not to injure the family which has entertained him.
In a note entitled
Marava jāti vernanam,26 from the Mackenzie Manuscripts,
it is recorded that “there are seven sub-divisions in the tribe of the Maravas,
respectively denominated Sembunāttu, Agattha, Oru-nāttu, Upukatti, and
Kurichikattu. Among these sub-divisions, that of the Sembunāttu Maravas is the
principal one.” In the Madras Census Report, 1891, the following are returned
as the most important sub-divisions:—Agamudaiyan, Kallan, Kārana, Kondaikatti,
Kottāni, Sembanāttu, and Vannikutti, Among the Sembanāttus (or Sembanādus), the
following septs or khilais have been recorded:—
|
|
[33]
“The Kondayamkottai
Maravars,” Mr. F. Fawcett writes,27 “are divided into six sub-tribes,
or, as they call them, trees. Each tree, or kothu, is divided into three
khilais or branches. These I call septs. Those of the khilais belonging to the
same tree or kothu are never allowed to intermarry. A man or woman must marry
with one of a khilai belonging to another tree than his own, his or her own
being that of his or her mother, and not of the father. But marriage is not
permissible between those of any two trees or kothus: there are some
restrictions. For instance, a branch of betel vine or leaves may marry with a
branch of cocoanut, but not with areca nuts or dates. I am not positive what
all the restrictions are, but restrictions of some kind, by which marriage
between persons of all trees may not be made indiscriminately, certainly exist.
The names of the trees or kothus and of the khilais or branches, as given to me
from the Maraver Pādel, a book considered to be authoritative, are these—
Tree.
|
Kothu.
|
Khilai.
|
|
Milaku
|
Pepper vine
|
 |
Viramudithanginan.
|
Sedhar.
|
|||
Semanda.
|
|||
Vettile
|
Betel vine
|
|
Agastyar.
|
Maruvidu.
|
|||
Alakhiya Pandiyan.
|
|||
Thennang
|
Cocoanut
|
|
Vaniyan.
|
Vettuvan.
|
|||
Nataivendar.
|
|||
Komukham
|
Areca nut
|
|
Kelnambhi.
|
Anbutran.
|
|||
Gautaman.
|
|||
Ichang
|
Dates
|
|
Sadachi.
|
Sangaran.
|
|||
Pichipillai.
|
|||
Panang
|
Palmyra
|
|
Akhili.
|
Lokhamurti
|
|||
Jambhuvar.
|
[34]
“Unfortunately I am
unable to trace out the meanings of all these khilais. Agastya and Gautamar
are, of course, sages of old. Viramudithanginan seems to mean a king’s
crown-bearer. Alakhiya Pandiyan seems to be one of the old Pandiyan kings of
Madura (alakhiya means beautiful). Akhili is perhaps intended to mean the wife
of Gautama, Lokamurti, the one being of the world, and Jambhuvar, a monkey king
with a bear’s face, who lived long, long ago. The common rule regulating
marriages among Brāhmans, and indeed people of almost every caste in Southern
India, is that the proper husband for the girl is her mother’s brother or his
son. But this is not so among the Kondayamkottai Maravars. A girl can never
marry her mother’s brother, because they are of the same khilai. On the other
hand, the children of a brother and sister may marry, and should do so, if this
can be arranged, as, though the brother and sister are of the same khilai,
their children are not, because the children of the brother belong perforce to
that of their mother, who is of a different khilai. It very often happens that
a man marries into his father’s khilai; indeed there seems to be some idea that
he should do so if possible. The children of brothers may not marry with each
other, although they are of different khilais, for two brothers may not marry
into the same khilai. One of the first things to be done in connection with a
marriage is that the female relations of the bridegroom must go and examine the
intended bride, to test her physical suitability. She should not, as it was
explained to me, have a flat foot; the calf of her leg should be slender, not
so thick as the thigh; the skin on the throat should not form more than two
wrinkles; the hair over the temple should grow [35]crossways. The last is very important.” A curl
on the forehead resembling the head of a snake is of evil omen.
In one form of the
marriage rites as carried out by the Maravans, the bridegroom’s party proceed,
on an auspicious day which has been fixed beforehand, to the home of the bride,
taking with them five cocoanuts, five bunches of plantains, five pieces of
turmeric, betel, and flowers, and the tāli strung on a thread dyed with
turmeric. At the auspicious hour, the bride is seated within the house on a
plank, facing east. The bridegroom’s sister removes the string of black beads
from her neck, and ties the tāli thereon. While this is being done, the
conch-shell is blown, and women indulge in what Mr. Fawcett describes as a
shrill kind of keening (kulavi idal). The bride is taken to the house of the
bridegroom, where they sit side by side on a plank, and the ceremony of warding
off the evil eye is performed. Further, milk is poured by people with crossed
hands over the heads of the couple. A feast is held, in which meat takes a
prominent part. A Maravan, who was asked to describe the marriage ceremony,
replied that it consists in killing a sheep or fowl, and the bringing of the
bride by the bridegroom’s sister to her brother’s house after the tāli has been
tied. The Kondaikatti Maravans, in some places, substitute for the usual golden
tāli a token representing “the head of Indra fastened to a bunch of human hair,
or silken strings representing his hair.”28
In another form of the
marriage ceremony, the father of the bridegroom goes to the bride’s house, [36]accompanied by his relations, with the following
articles in a box made of plaited palmyra leaves:—
|
|
At the bride’s house,
these presents are touched by those assembled there, and the box is handed over
to the bride’s father. On the wedding day (which is four days afterwards),
pongal (cooked rice) is offered to the house god early in the morning. Later in
the day, the bridegroom is taken in a palanquin to the house of the bride.
Betel is presented to him by her father or brother. The bride generally remains
within the house till the time for tying the tāli has arrived. The maternal
uncle then blindfolds her with his hand, lifts her up, and carries her to the
bridegroom, Four women stand round the contracting couple, and pass round a
dish containing a broken cocoanut and a cake three times. The bride and bridegroom
then spit into the dish, and the females set up their shrill keening. The
maternal uncles join their hands together, and, on receiving the assent of
those present, the bridegroom’s sister ties the tāli on the bride’s neck. The
tāli consists of a ring attached to a black silk thread. After marriage, the
“silk tāli” is, for every day purposes, replaced by golden beads strung on a
string, and the tāli used at the wedding is often borrowed for the occasion.
The tāli having been tied, the pair are blessed, and, in some places, their
knees, shoulders, heads, and backs are touched with a betel leaf dipped in
milk, and blessed with the words “May the pair be prosperous, giving rise to
leaves like a banyan tree, roots like the thurvi (Cynodon Dactylon)
grass, and like the bamboo.” Of [37]the thurvi grass it is said in the Atharwana
Vēda “May this grass, which rose from the water of life, which has a hundred
roots and a hundred stems, efface a hundred of my sins, and prolong my
existence on earth for a hundred years.”
Still further variants
of the marriage ceremonial are described by Mr. Fawcett, in one of which “the
Brāhman priest (purōhit) hands the tāli to the bridegroom’s sister, who in turn
hands it to the bridegroom, who ties a knot in it. The sister then ties two
more knots in it, and puts it round the bride’s neck. After this has been done,
and while the pair are still seated, the Brāhman ties together the little
fingers of the right hands of the pair, which are interlocked, with a silken
thread. The pair then rise, walk thrice round the marriage seat (manavanai),
and enter the house, where they sit, and the bridegroom receives present from
the bride’s father. The fingers are then untied. While undergoing the ceremony,
the bridegroom wears a thread smeared with turmeric tied round the right wrist.
It is called kappu.”
In the manuscript
already quoted,29 it is noted that “should it so
happen, either in the case of wealthy rulers of districts or of poorer common
people, that any impediment arises to prevent the complete celebration of the
marriage with all attendant ceremonies according to the sacred books and
customs of the tribe, then the tāli only is sent, and the female is brought to
the house of her husband. At a subsequent period, even after two or three
children have been born, the husband sends the usual summons to a marriage of
areca nut and betel leaf; and, when the relatives are assembled, the bride [38]and bridegroom are publicly seated in state
under the marriage pandal; the want of completeness in the former contract is
made up; and, all needful ceremonies being gone through, they perform the
public procession through the streets of the town, when they break the cocoanut
in the presence of Vignēsvara (Ganēsa), and, according to the means possessed
by the parties, the celebration of the marriage is concluded in one day, or
prolonged to two, three or four days. The tāli, being tied on, has the name of
katu tāli, and the name of the last ceremony is called the removal of the
former deficiency. If it so happen that, after the first ceremony, the second
be not performed, then the children of such an alliance are lightly regarded
among the Maravas. Should the husband die during the continuance of the first
relation, and before the second ceremony be performed, then the body of the
man, and also the woman are placed upon the same seat, and the ceremonies of
the second marriage, according to the customs of the tribe, being gone through,
the tāli is taken off; the woman is considered to be a widow, and can marry
with some other man.” It is further recorded30 of the Orunāttu Maravans that
“the elder or younger sister of the bridegroom goes to the house of the bride,
and, to the sound of the conch-shell, ties on the tāli; and, early on the
following morning, brings her to the house of the bridegroom. After some time,
occasionally three or four years, when there are indications of offspring, in
the fourth or fifth month, the relatives of the pair assemble, and perform the
ceremony of removing the deficiency; placing the man and his wife on a seat in
public, and having the sacrifice by fire and other matters conducted by the
Prōhitan (or Brāhman); [39]after which the relatives sprinkle seshai rice
(or rice beaten out without any application of water) over the heads of the
pair. The relatives are feasted and otherwise hospitably entertained; and these
in return bestow donations on the pair, from one fanam to one pagoda. The
marriage is then finished. Sometimes, when money for expenses is wanting, this
wedding ceremony is postponed till after the birth of two or three children. If
the first husband dies, another marriage is customary. Should it so happen that
the husband, after the tying on of the tāli in the first instance, dislikes the
object of his former choice, then the people of their tribe are assembled; she
is conducted back to her mother’s house; sheep, oxen, eating-plate, with brass
cup, jewels, ornaments, and whatever else she may have brought with her from
her mother’s house, are returned; and the tāli, which was put on, is broken off
and taken away. If the wife dislikes the husband, then the money he paid, the
expenses which he incurred in the wedding, the tāli which he caused to be bound
on her, are restored to him, and the woman, taking whatsoever she brought with
her, returns to her mother’s house, and marries again at her pleasure.”
It is recorded, in the
Madras Census Report, 1891, that “a special custom obtaining among the Marava
zemindars of Tinnevelly is mentioned by the Registrar of that district. It is
the celebration of marriage by means of a proxy for the bridegroom in the shape
of a stick, which is sent by the bridegroom, and is set up in the marriage
booth in his place. The tāli is tied by some one representative of the
bridegroom, and the marriage ceremony then becomes complete.... Widow
re-marriage is freely allowed and practiced, except in the Sembunāttu
sub-division.” “A widow,” [40]Mr. Fawcett writes, “may marry her deceased
husband’s elder brother, but not a younger brother. If she does not like him,
she may marry some one else.”
When a girl reaches
puberty, news of the event is conveyed by a washerman. On the sixteenth day she
comes out of seclusion, bathes, and returns home. At the threshold, her future
husband’s sister is standing, and averts the evil eye by waving betel leaves,
plantains, cocoanuts, cooked flour paste (puttu), a vessel filled with water,
and an iron measure containing rice with a style (ambu) stuck in it. The style
is removed by the girl’s prospective sister-in-law, who beats her with it as
she enters the house. A feast is held at the expense of the girl’s maternal
uncle, who brings a goat, and ties it to a pole at her house.
Both burial and
cremation are practiced by the Maravans. The Sembunāttu Maravans of Rāmnād
regard the Agamudaiyans as their servants, and the water, with which the corpse
is washed, is brought by them. Further, it is an Agamudaiyan, and not the son
of the deceased, who carries the fire-pot to the burial-ground. The corpse is
carried thither on a bier or palanquin. The grave is dug by an Āndi, never by a
Pallan or Paraiyan. Salt, powdered brick, and sacred ashes are placed on the
floor thereof and the corpse is placed in it in a sitting posture. The
Kondaiyamkottai Maravans of Rāmnād, who are stone and brick masons, burn their
dead, and, on their way to the burning-ground, the bearers of the corpse walk
over cloths spread on the ground. On the second or third day, lingams are made
out of the ashes, or of mud from the grave if the corpse has been buried. To
these, as well as to the soul of the deceased, and to the crows, offerings are
made. On the sixteenth day, [41]nine kinds of seed-grain are placed over the
grave, or the spot where the corpse was burnt. A Pandāram sets up five kalasams
(brass vessels), and does pūja (worship). The son of the deceased, who
officiated as chief mourner, goes to a Pillayar (Ganēsa) shrine, carrying on
his head a pot containing a lighted lamp made of flour. As he draws near the
god, a screen is stretched in front thereof. He then takes a few steps
backwards, the screen is removed, and he worships the god. He then retires,
walking backwards. The flour is distributed among those present. Presents of
new cloths are made to the sons and daughters of the deceased. In his account
of the Kondaiyamkottai Maravans, Mr. Fawcett gives the following account of the
funeral rites. “Sandals having been fastened on the feet, the corpse is carried
in a recumbent position, legs first, to the place of cremation. A little rice
is placed in the mouth, and the relatives put a little money into a small
vessel which is kept beside the chest. The karma karta (chief mourner) walks
thrice round the corpse, carrying an earthen vessel filled with water, in which
two or three holes are pierced. He allows some water to fall on the corpse, and
breaks the pot near the head, which lies to the south. No Brāhman attends this
part of the ceremony. When he has broken the pot, the karma karta must not see
the corpse again; he goes away at once, and is completely shaved. The barber
takes the cash which has been collected, and lights the pyre. When he returns
to the house, the karma karta prostrates himself before a lighted lamp; he
partakes of no food, except a little grain and boiled pulse and water, boiled
with coarse palm sugar and ginger. Next day he goes to the place of cremation,
picks up such calcined bones as he finds, and places them in a basket, so that
he may some day throw them in [42]water which is considered to be sacred. On the
eleventh or twelfth day, some grain is sown in two new earthen vessels which
have been broken, and there is continued weeping around these. On the sixteenth
day, the young plants, which have sprouted, are removed, and put into water,
weeping going on all the while; and, after this has been done, the relatives
bathe and enjoy a festive meal, after which the karma karta is seated on a
white cloth, and is presented with a new cloth and some money by his
father-in-law and other relatives who are present. On the seventeenth day takes
place the punyagavachanam or purification, at which the Brāhman priest
presides, and the karma karta takes an oil bath. The wood of the pīpal tree (Ficus
religiosa) is never used for purposes of cremation.”
Concerning the death
ceremonies in the Trichinopoly district, Mr. F. R. Hemingway writes as follows.
“Before the corpse is removed, the chief mourner and his wife take two balls of
cow-dung, in which the barber has mixed various kinds of grain, and stick them
on to the wall of the house. These are thrown into water on the eighth day. The
ceremonial is called pattam kattugiradu, or investing with the title, and
indicates the succession to the dead man’s estate. A rocket is fired when the
corpse is taken out of the house. On the sixth day, a pandal (booth) of nāval (Eugenia,
Jambolana) leaves is prepared, and offerings are made in it to the manes of
the ancestors of the family. It is removed on the eighth day, and the chief
mourner puts a turban on, and merry-making and dances are indulged in. There
are ordinarily no karumāntaram ceremonies, but they are sometimes performed on
the sixteenth day, a Brāhman being called in. On the return home from these
ceremonies, each member of the party has to dip his toe [43]into a mortar full of cow-dung water, and the
last man has to knock it down.”
Maravars Prepare for Jallikattu bull.
Among some
Kondaiyamkottai Maravans, a ceremony called palaya karmāndhiram, or old death
ceremony, is performed. Some months after the death of one who has died an
unnatural death, the skull is exhumed, and placed beneath a pandal (booth) in
an open space near the village. Libations of toddy are indulged in, and the
villagers dance wildly round the head. The ceremony lasts over three days, and
the final death ceremonies are then performed.
For the following
account of the jellikattu or bull-baiting, which is practiced by the Maravans,
I am indebted to a note by Mr. J. H. Nelson.31 “This,” he writes, “is a game
worthy of a bold and free people, and it is to be regretted that certain
Collectors (District Magistrates) should have discouraged it under the idea
that it was somewhat dangerous. The jellikattu is conducted in the following
manner. On a certain day in the year, large crowds of people, chiefly males,
assemble together in the morning in some extensive open space, the dry bed of a
river perhaps, or of a tank (pond), and many of them may be seen leading
ploughing bullocks, of which the sleek bodies and rather wicked eyes afford
clear evidence of the extra diet they have received for some days in
anticipation of the great event. The owners of these animals soon begin to brag
of their strength and speed, and to challenge all and any to catch and hold
them; and in a short time one of the best beasts is selected to open the day’s
proceedings. A new cloth is made fast round his horns, to be the prize of his
captor, and he is then led [44]out into the midst of the arena by his owner,
and there left to himself surrounded by a throng of shouting and excited
strangers. Unaccustomed to this sort of treatment, and excited by the gestures
of those who have undertaken to catch him, the bullock usually lowers his head
at once, and charges wildly into the midst of the crowd, who nimbly run off on
either side to make way for him. His speed being much greater than that of the
men, he soon overtakes one of his enemies and makes at him to toss him
savagely. Upon this the man drops on the sand like a stone, and the bullock,
instead of goring him, leaps over his body, and rushes after another. The
second man drops in his turn, and is passed like the first; and, after
repeating this operation several times, the beast either succeeds in breaking
the ring, and galloping off to his village, charging every person he meets on
the way, or is at last caught and held by the most vigorous of his pursuers.
Strange as it may seem, the bullocks never by any chance toss or gore any one
who throws himself down on their approach; and the only danger arises from
their accidentally reaching unseen and unheard some one who remains standing.
After the first two or three animals have been let loose one after the other,
two or three, or even half a dozen are let loose at a time, and the scene
quickly becomes most exciting. The crowd sways violently to and fro in various
directions in frantic efforts to escape being knocked over; the air is filled
with shouts, screams, and laughter; and the bullocks thunder over the plain as
fiercely as if blood and slaughter were their sole occupation. In this way
perhaps two or three hundred animals are run in the course of a day, and, when
all go home towards evening, a few cuts and bruises, borne with the utmost
cheerfulness, [45]are the only results of an amusement which
requires great courage and agility on the part of the competitors for the
prizes—that is for the cloths and other things tied to the bullocks’ horns—and
not a little on the part of the mere bystanders. The only time I saw this sport
(from a place of safety) I was highly delighted with the entertainment, and no
accident occurred to mar my pleasure. One man indeed was slightly wounded in
the buttock, but he was quite able to walk, and seemed to be as happy as his
friends.”
A further account of the
jallikat or jellicut is given in the Gazetteer of the Madura district. “The
word jallikattu literally means tying of ornaments. On a day fixed and
advertised by beat of drums at the adjacent weekly markets, a number of cattle,
to the horns of which cloths and handkerchiefs have been tied, are loosed one
after the other, in quick succession, from a large pen or other enclosure, amid
a furious tom-tomming and loud shouts from the crowd of assembled spectators.
The animals have first to run the gauntlet down a long lane formed of country
carts, and then gallop off wildly in every direction. The game consists in
endeavouring to capture the cloths tied to their horns. To do this requires
fleetness of foot and considerable pluck, and those who are successful are the
heroes of the hour. Cuts and bruises are the reward of those who are less
skilful, and now and again some of the excited cattle charge into the
on-lookers, and send a few of them flying. The sport has been prohibited on
more than one occasion. But, seeing that no one need run any risks unless he
chooses, existing official opinion inclines to the view that it is a pity to
discourage a manly amusement which is not really more dangerous than football,
steeple-chasing, or fox-hunting. The keenness [46]of the more virile sections of the community,
especially the Kallans (q.v.), in this game is extraordinary, and, in
many villages, cattle are bred and reared specially for it. The best jallikats
are to be seen in the Kallan country in Tirumangalam, and next come those in
Mēlur and Madura taluks.”
“Boomerangs,” Dr. G.
Oppert writes,32 “are used by the Maravans and
Kallans when hunting deer. The Madras Museum collection contains three (two
ivory, one wooden) from the Tanjore armoury. In the arsenal of the Pudukōttai
Rāja a stock of wooden boomerangs is always kept. Their name in Tamil is valai
tade (bent stick).” To Mr. R. Bruce Foote, I am indebted for the following note
on the use of the boomerang in the Madura district. “A very favourite weapon of
the Madura country is a kind of curved throwing-stick, having a general
likeness to the boomerang of the Australian aborigines. I have in my collection
two of these Maravar weapons obtained from near Sivaganga. The larger measures
24⅛″ along the outer curve, and the chord of the arc 17⅝″. At the handle end is
a rather ovate knob 2¼″ long and 1¼″ in its maximum thickness. The thinnest and
smallest part of the weapon is just beyond the knob, and measures 11/16″ in
diameter by 1⅛″ in width. From that point onwards its width increases very
gradually to the distal end, where it measures 2⅜″ across and is squarely
truncated. The lateral diameter is greatest three or four inches before the
truncated end, where it measures 1″. My second specimen is a little smaller
than the above, and is also rather less curved. Both are made of hard heavy
wood, dark reddish brown in colour as seen through the [47]varnish covering the surface. The wood is said
to be tamarind root. The workmanship is rather rude. I had an opportunity of
seeing these boomerangs in use near Sivaganga in March, 1883. In the morning I
came across many parties, small and large, of men and big boys who were out
hare-hunting with a few dogs. The parties straggled over the ground, which was
sparsely covered with low scrub jungle. And, whenever an unlucky hare started
out near to the hunters, it was greeted with a volley of the boomerangs, so
strongly and dexterously thrown that poor puss had little chance of escape. I
saw several knocked out of time. On making enquiries as to these hunting
parties, I was told that they were in observance of a semi-religious duty, in
which every Maravar male, not unfitted by age or ill-health, is bound to
participate on a particular day in the year. Whether a dexterous Maravar
thrower could make his weapon return to him I could not find out. Certainly in
none of the throws observed by me was any tendency to a return perceptible. But
for simple straight shots these boomerangs answer admirably.”
The Maravans bear
Saivite sectarian marks, but also worship various minor deities, among whom are
included Kāli, Karuppan, Muthu Karuppan, Periya Karuppan, Mathurai Vīran,
Aiyanar, and Mūnuswāmi.
The lobes of the ears of
Marava females are very elongated as the result of boring and gradual
dilatation during childhood. Mr. (now Sir) F. A. Nicholson, who was some years
ago stationed at Ramnād, tells me that the young Maravan princesses used to
come and play in his garden, and, as they ran races, hung on to their ears,
lest the heavy ornaments should rend asunder the filamentous ear lobes.[48]
It was recorded, in
1902, that a young Maravan, who was a member of the family of the Zemindar of
Chokampatti, was the first non-Christian Maravan to pass the B.A. degree
examination at the Madras University.
The general title of the
Maravans is Tēvan (god), but some style themselves Talaivan (chief),
Sērvaikkāran (captain), Karaiyālan (ruler of the coast), or Rāyarvamsam (Rāja’s
clan).
Maravar jati Varnam-William Taylor(Mckenzi Manuscript)
The Way Of The Maravan
Introduction
Maravar (Tamil: மறவர்) are one of the oldest social groups to be mentioned by the Sangam Tamil literature. This indicates an association with the Tamil land which is at least 2,000 years old. The writers of the Sangam Age place them in rural settlements withdrawn from cities. Maravar, in Tamil, means a warrior. Maravars are the courageous breed and were involved in the major wars that Tamilnadu witnessed.
Other historians postulate that Maravar is derived from Tamil language term Marutham (called as Thinnai). They originally lived in (See Ancient Tamil country). The name of the city Madurai is also postulated to be derived from Maruthai and honorific title of local Pandya kings.
Current Status
Although a great many of the members are still agriculturalists, many have also progressed up the social ladder as doctors, engineers, entrepreneurs, politicians and civil servants. Large number of people from the community are serving the nation as military men. Large number of people serving the tamilnadu police department.
[edit] The code of suicide by warriors or maravars in ancient tamilnadu
Avippali, Thannai, Verttal, Vallan pakkam, Pun Kilithu Mudiyum Maram and Marakkanchi: the forms of martial suicide and suicidal battle of the warrior as the ultimate expression of his loyalty to his commander. These six forms of martial suicide are defined as described by the works referred to above.
Pulla Vazhkai Vallan Pakkam – the martial attitude of the warrior who goes forth into suicidal battle is mentioned by Tholkappiyam. The other works refer to it as Thannai Verttal. Duarte Barbosa describes the practice among the Nayar (of the Chera kingdom). It was later noticed by British officials as well. It was also prevalent among the Maravar (of the Pandya kingdom) from whom the suicidal Aapathhuthavi bodyguard was selected. Thannai Verttal also refers to the suicide of a warrior on hearing that his king or commander has died (Purapporul Venpa Malai). Punkilithu Mudiyum Maram is the martial act of a warrior who commits suicide by tearing apart his battle wound.
Another form of martial suicide mentioned by all the works except Veera soliyam, is Avippali. Tamil inscriptions speak of it as Navakandam. Inscriptions found in many parts of Tamilnadu provide greater information on the practice. Navakandam is the act of a warrior who slices his own neck to fulfil the vow made to korravai – the Tamil goddess of war – for his commanders’ victory in battle. The Kalingathu Parani(10) – a work which celebrates the victory of the Chola king Kulotunga and his general Thondaman in the battle for Kalinga, describes the practice in detail. “The temple of korravai is decorated with lotus flowers which bloomed when the warriors sliced their own necks”(106); “they slice the base of their necks; the severed heads are given to the goddess”(111); “when the neck is sliced and the head is severed, the headless body jumps with joy for having fulfilled the vow”(113).
The epics of Chilapadikaram (5: 79-86) and Manimekalai (6: 50-51) mention the practice. To ensure the complete severing of the head, the warrior tied his hair to a bamboo bent taut before he cut his neck. Hero stones depicting this practice are found all over Tamil Nadu, and are called Saavan Kallu by locals. The warriors who thus committed suicide were not only deified in hero stones (saavan kallu) and worshipped but their relatives were given lands which were exempted from tax(11).
An area handbook (Tharamangalam) of the Tamilnadu archeology department notes that “the Nava Kandam sculpture which is found widely all over Kongu Nadu (Coimbatore, Salem) is to be seen at the Tharamangalam Kailasanathar kovil also. The people call it Saavan Kallu. “The practice of Nava Kandam existed in Kongu Nadu till the early part of this [i.e., 20th] century.”(12)
A Saavan Kallu at Thenkarai Moolanatha sami Kovil in Madurai, depicting the act of a warrior holding his hair with his left hand and slicing his neck with his right – 14th century – is said to be annually worshipped by the Conjeevaram Mudaliyars.(13) The Conjeevaram Mudaliyars are Kaikolar, a presentday weaving caste which was militarized under the Chola empire and was made into a special military body; there are indications that Kaikolar warriors practiced Nava Kandam(14).
Apart from these codified forms of martial suicide, a method called Vadakkiruththal is mentioned in Tamil heroic poetry. It is the act of a warrior king fasting to death, if some dire dishonour were to come upon him(15). The Tamil teacher, and the Dravidian propagandist, turned the song of the legendary Chera king Irumborai who committed suicide when he was taken captive by his enemies into a compelling theme in Tamil renaissance.
The Avippali form of martial suicide as the ultimate expression of loyalty to one’s commander, is deeply embedded in the Tamil psyche. Senchorru-kadan (the debt of red rice) is a phrase that is widely used today by Tamils as an expression of loyalty. One frequently hears of it in a popular Tamil song. The phrase sands for the ritual of partaking of rice by which Maravar and other Tamil military caste warriors bound themselves to their king or commander to die in suicidal battle for him, or to commit suicide on the day he was slain. Of Avippali, the Puraporul Venba Malai ([verse] 92) says, “thinking of nothing but the red (blood) rice the Maravar give their life as offering in battle.”
The ritual of red or blood rice was described by two Muslim travellers who had visited the Tamil country in the 9th century. “A quantity of cooked rice was spread before the king, and some three or four hundred persons came of their own accord and received each a small quantity of rice from the king’s own hands, after he himself had eaten some. By eating of this rice, they all engage themselvesto burn themselves on the day the king dies or is slain; and they punctually fulfill their promise.”(16) In modern times it has been observed that “when a Maravar takes food in the house of a stranger, he will take a pinch of earth and put it on the food before he commences his meal.”(17) This act freed him from the debt of blood rice.[3]
Some also committed suicide by eating bricks.
Thus, towards the latter part of the 19th century, there were large, disgruntled groups with a military past in the Bengal, Bombay and Madras Presidencies. They felt that the vast field of opportunities opened by the expanding Indian army was being unfairly denied to them. This grievance was further exacerbated by views of the British military leadership which relegated them to a non-martial status as races that were not fit to bear arms; in whom fighting qualities had declined.
The reaction of these groups was marked by a compulsion to emphasise the martial credentials of their cultures. Opposition to British rule which emerged among classes affected by the shift in recruitment toward the ‘martial races’ of North western India took shape into an ideology that asserted a national spirit which exalted military virtues and ideals as the cure for the ills of Indian society under the British yoke. Bal Gangadhar Tilak who emerged as a spokesman for the disfranchised military groups became the ideologue of this nationalist Indian militarism. Stephen Cohen has attempted to define Indian militarism in terms of Indian attitudes towards the British-Indian military structure and recruitment.
“There are two fundamentally different sets of Indian attitudes towards the British-Indian military structure, both of which may legitimately be labelled Indian militarism: modern militarism and traditional militarism…emerged in Bengal and western India and spread to other regions. Modern militarism stressed the value of the military as a national universal solvent; as an expression of the national will and demanded equalitarian recruitment. ‘Traditional militarism’ resulted from regional traditions and the recruiting practices of the British. It was confined to those castes and classes which exercised the use of arms as matter of birth right and was unevenly distributed throughout India…”(14)
At the turn of the [20th] century there were two groups in the Tamil region which had a decidedly militarist and anti-British outlook. (a) the adherents of modern Indian militarism – the terrorists – and their sympathizers. (b) the disfranchised traditional military castes. The dispersion of modern Indian militarism’s basic tenet – that the revival of India’s ‘heroic age’ and its war-like traditions and valus was necessary for national emancipation – invested the heroic past and martial cultures of the disenfranchised traditional Tamil military castes with a nationalist significance and cogence. Modern Tamil militarism – the political idea that military virtues and ideals ‘rooted in Tamil martial traditions’ is essential for national resurgence and emancipation – was enunciated at this specific conjuncture in the school of Tamil renaissance established by Pandithurai Thevar – a noble belonging to the sethupathy clan of the dominant traditional Tamil military caste – the Maravar.
Tamil militarism then, is the effect of inter-related modern and traditional components; the former as nationalist renaissance ideology, the latter as caste culture. Traditional Tamil militarism in the Tamil region as elsewhere in India was confined to a group of castes which considered “the use of arms as matter of birth and right”. The Maravar were, according to the Madras Presidency census report for 1891 “a fierce and turbulent race famous for their military prowess” and were “chiefly found in Madura and Tinnevely where they occupy the tracts bordering in the coast from Cape Comorin to the northern limits of the Ramnad Zemindari.”(15) The Dutch found them to be the traditional soldier caste of Jaffna and availed themselves of their caste services as such (16) – one of the earliest instances of a colonial power making use of a specific military caste in South Asia.
Cohen notes two categories of traditional Indian military castes with different grievances at the turn of the 19th century. (a) “members of classes which were no longer recruited or recruited in small numbers”, (b) “those classes which constituted the army but sought even greater status as commissioned officers.”(17)
The Maravar and their grievances, however belong to a third category. They were a people whom the British attempted to totally demilitarize by depriving them of their traditional status in Tamil society through social, economic and penal measures. This was in direct contrast to the social and economic privileging of such castes and classes in the north, during the same period. They were not only disfranchised but were turned into and classified as a delinquent mass – the subject of a disciplinary and penal discourse – relegated to the fringes of the new social pact which was being established in the Tamil South of the Madras Presidency. The obliteration of their traditions and memory was considered essential to complete the process of demilitarization and pacification of the Tamil region. The martial races theory of recruitment and the subsequent martialization of the north further erased their martial legacy and that of the Tamil South from the military ethnography of the subcontinent.
David Washbrook argues that “the subvention and protection of the north Indian dominant caste communities, and the martialization of their culture, were but two of the many ways in which south Asia paid the price of liberal Britain’s prosperity and progress.”(18) On the other hand the strategy of emasculating and destroying the hegemony of Tamil military caste communities and the demartialization of Tamil culture were two important ways in which the Tamil South paid the price of India’s development as a nation.
The legacy of these strategies in the north and south of the subcontinent, embodied in the structure of the modern Indian army, is central to the emergence of modern Tamil militarism. The gains of this demartialization were consolidated by favouring and encouraging non-military castes in Tamil society which “contrasted favourably with the Maravar”.(19)
The more important of these were the Vellalas, Nadars and Adi Dravidas. The culture and values of the “peace loving” (Madras census, 1871) Vellalas who had “no other calling than the cultivation of the soil” eminently suited the aims of demartialization and suppression of the traditional military castes. In this the British were following local precedents which had been based on the principle that the best way to ensure control and security was to “have none there but cultivators” (21). Thus, under active British patronage the Vellala caste established its dominance, and its culture became representative and hegemonic in Tamil society. The Nadars and Adi Dravidas were considered amenable to conversion. A large section of them had become Anglicans. The recruitment base of the Indian army in the Madras Presidency was constituted strongly in favour of these groups. The Dravidian ideology emerged as the cultural and academic basis for their pro-British politics, led by the newly arisen Vellala elite.
The nascent Dravidian movement was clearly underpinned by the concerns of British administrators and Anglican missionaries (22) in consolidating the social, economic and religious gains of demartialization. This is why the early Dravidian school of Tamil studies and historiography had a strong political compulsion to reject, ignore or play down the dominant role of the traditional military castes in Tamil history and culture, and to assert that Tamil civilization was Vellala civilization. (Maraimalai Atikal, was the chief proponent of this view.)
Thus in the early decades of the twentieth century we find two contending narratives (23) of Tamil national identity – the ideology and caste culture of the anti-British and “turbulent” military castes and the ideology and caste culture of the pro-British and “peace loving” Vellala elite – claiming authentic readings of the Tamilian past and present. The one claiming that the “pure Tamils” were Vellalas. The other claiming that all Tamils are Maravar and that the Tamil nation was distinguished by its ancient martial heritage. How then did Tamil militarism which originally was related to a political and social milieu that was opposed to the Dravidian movement become its dominant feature in the [nineteen] fifties and sixties to the levelof strongly impacting on the Tamil nationalist movement in Sri Lanka’s north and east?
It was related politically to changes that took place in the Dravidian movement and the changes that took place in Maravar – Indian National Congress relations after the [19]30’s. In the Dravidian movement the change was connected mainly with, (a) the rejection of the pro-British elitist leadership of the Justice Party in 1944. (b) the radical change in the attitude towards British rule and imperialism in 1947048 which gave rise to sharp differences within the movement.
Relations between the Indian National Congress and the Maravar began to deteriorate when the moderate Brahmin leadership of the Madras Presidency Congress preferred not to oppose the harsh measures of the British against the Tamil military castes. The contradiction became sharp when Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar the powerful and influential Marava leader, joined the Indian National Army under Subash Chandra Bose and began organizing the Forward Bloc against the Congress in the Tamil region.(24) The antagonism climaxed in a violent caste conflict in 1957. The Congress government arrested Muthuramalinga Thevar in connection with the riot. The DMK which had very little influence in the southern districts of Tamil Nadu at that time made a strategic intervention at this juncture in Maravar affairs. M.Karunanidhi, the only DMK candidate to be elected in the southern parts at that time, was chiefly responsible for co-opting the Maravar into the DMK; and for making the culture of the Tamil military castes a dominant and essential component of Tamilian national identity.
For many years, until he became chief minister, Karunanidhi wrote under the pen-name Maravan. His weekly letter to party cadres was known as Maravan Madal (25) – the Maravan’s epistle. Tamil militarism thus became integral to the Dravidian movement. The secessionist militancy of the DMK in the [nineteen] fifties and early [nineteen] sixties wad dominated by the vocabulary of Tamil militarism. This was the nadir of the Dravidian movement’s impact on Sri Lankan Tamils. DMK branches were organized in many parts of the north, east and the hill country. It was during this period that ayoung student named Kathamuthu Sivanandan from Amirthakazhi, a small village near the Batticaloa town who was studying in Tamil Nadu took part in the militant agitations of the DMK. Karunanidhi described him as “the appropriate weapon for Tamil upheaval.”(26). The student who was later known as Kasi Anandan wrote for a fortnightly called Dhee Mu Ka (DMK) (27) when he came back to Sri Lanka. In it appeared his poem, ‘The Maravar clan’- Maravar kulam (28):
“The Tamil army is a Maravar Army…
the enraged Tamils are a Tiger Army (Pulippadai)…”
These lines of the poem are now part of the history and myths of the Tamil Tigers’ genesis
The reaction of these groups was marked by a compulsion to emphasise the martial credentials of their cultures. Opposition to British rule which emerged among classes affected by the shift in recruitment toward the ‘martial races’ of North western India took shape into an ideology that asserted a national spirit which exalted military virtues and ideals as the cure for the ills of Indian society under the British yoke. Bal Gangadhar Tilak who emerged as a spokesman for the disfranchised military groups became the ideologue of this nationalist Indian militarism. Stephen Cohen has attempted to define Indian militarism in terms of Indian attitudes towards the British-Indian military structure and recruitment.
“There are two fundamentally different sets of Indian attitudes towards the British-Indian military structure, both of which may legitimately be labelled Indian militarism: modern militarism and traditional militarism…emerged in Bengal and western India and spread to other regions. Modern militarism stressed the value of the military as a national universal solvent; as an expression of the national will and demanded equalitarian recruitment. ‘Traditional militarism’ resulted from regional traditions and the recruiting practices of the British. It was confined to those castes and classes which exercised the use of arms as matter of birth right and was unevenly distributed throughout India…”(14)
At the turn of the [20th] century there were two groups in the Tamil region which had a decidedly militarist and anti-British outlook. (a) the adherents of modern Indian militarism – the terrorists – and their sympathizers. (b) the disfranchised traditional military castes. The dispersion of modern Indian militarism’s basic tenet – that the revival of India’s ‘heroic age’ and its war-like traditions and valus was necessary for national emancipation – invested the heroic past and martial cultures of the disenfranchised traditional Tamil military castes with a nationalist significance and cogence. Modern Tamil militarism – the political idea that military virtues and ideals ‘rooted in Tamil martial traditions’ is essential for national resurgence and emancipation – was enunciated at this specific conjuncture in the school of Tamil renaissance established by Pandithurai Thevar – a noble belonging to the sethupathy clan of the dominant traditional Tamil military caste – the Maravar.
Tamil militarism then, is the effect of inter-related modern and traditional components; the former as nationalist renaissance ideology, the latter as caste culture. Traditional Tamil militarism in the Tamil region as elsewhere in India was confined to a group of castes which considered “the use of arms as matter of birth and right”. The Maravar were, according to the Madras Presidency census report for 1891 “a fierce and turbulent race famous for their military prowess” and were “chiefly found in Madura and Tinnevely where they occupy the tracts bordering in the coast from Cape Comorin to the northern limits of the Ramnad Zemindari.”(15) The Dutch found them to be the traditional soldier caste of Jaffna and availed themselves of their caste services as such (16) – one of the earliest instances of a colonial power making use of a specific military caste in South Asia.
Cohen notes two categories of traditional Indian military castes with different grievances at the turn of the 19th century. (a) “members of classes which were no longer recruited or recruited in small numbers”, (b) “those classes which constituted the army but sought even greater status as commissioned officers.”(17)
The Maravar and their grievances, however belong to a third category. They were a people whom the British attempted to totally demilitarize by depriving them of their traditional status in Tamil society through social, economic and penal measures. This was in direct contrast to the social and economic privileging of such castes and classes in the north, during the same period. They were not only disfranchised but were turned into and classified as a delinquent mass – the subject of a disciplinary and penal discourse – relegated to the fringes of the new social pact which was being established in the Tamil South of the Madras Presidency. The obliteration of their traditions and memory was considered essential to complete the process of demilitarization and pacification of the Tamil region. The martial races theory of recruitment and the subsequent martialization of the north further erased their martial legacy and that of the Tamil South from the military ethnography of the subcontinent.
David Washbrook argues that “the subvention and protection of the north Indian dominant caste communities, and the martialization of their culture, were but two of the many ways in which south Asia paid the price of liberal Britain’s prosperity and progress.”(18) On the other hand the strategy of emasculating and destroying the hegemony of Tamil military caste communities and the demartialization of Tamil culture were two important ways in which the Tamil South paid the price of India’s development as a nation.
The legacy of these strategies in the north and south of the subcontinent, embodied in the structure of the modern Indian army, is central to the emergence of modern Tamil militarism. The gains of this demartialization were consolidated by favouring and encouraging non-military castes in Tamil society which “contrasted favourably with the Maravar”.(19)
The more important of these were the Vellalas, Nadars and Adi Dravidas. The culture and values of the “peace loving” (Madras census, 1871) Vellalas who had “no other calling than the cultivation of the soil” eminently suited the aims of demartialization and suppression of the traditional military castes. In this the British were following local precedents which had been based on the principle that the best way to ensure control and security was to “have none there but cultivators” (21). Thus, under active British patronage the Vellala caste established its dominance, and its culture became representative and hegemonic in Tamil society. The Nadars and Adi Dravidas were considered amenable to conversion. A large section of them had become Anglicans. The recruitment base of the Indian army in the Madras Presidency was constituted strongly in favour of these groups. The Dravidian ideology emerged as the cultural and academic basis for their pro-British politics, led by the newly arisen Vellala elite.
The nascent Dravidian movement was clearly underpinned by the concerns of British administrators and Anglican missionaries (22) in consolidating the social, economic and religious gains of demartialization. This is why the early Dravidian school of Tamil studies and historiography had a strong political compulsion to reject, ignore or play down the dominant role of the traditional military castes in Tamil history and culture, and to assert that Tamil civilization was Vellala civilization. (Maraimalai Atikal, was the chief proponent of this view.)
Thus in the early decades of the twentieth century we find two contending narratives (23) of Tamil national identity – the ideology and caste culture of the anti-British and “turbulent” military castes and the ideology and caste culture of the pro-British and “peace loving” Vellala elite – claiming authentic readings of the Tamilian past and present. The one claiming that the “pure Tamils” were Vellalas. The other claiming that all Tamils are Maravar and that the Tamil nation was distinguished by its ancient martial heritage. How then did Tamil militarism which originally was related to a political and social milieu that was opposed to the Dravidian movement become its dominant feature in the [nineteen] fifties and sixties to the levelof strongly impacting on the Tamil nationalist movement in Sri Lanka’s north and east?
It was related politically to changes that took place in the Dravidian movement and the changes that took place in Maravar – Indian National Congress relations after the [19]30’s. In the Dravidian movement the change was connected mainly with, (a) the rejection of the pro-British elitist leadership of the Justice Party in 1944. (b) the radical change in the attitude towards British rule and imperialism in 1947048 which gave rise to sharp differences within the movement.
Relations between the Indian National Congress and the Maravar began to deteriorate when the moderate Brahmin leadership of the Madras Presidency Congress preferred not to oppose the harsh measures of the British against the Tamil military castes. The contradiction became sharp when Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar the powerful and influential Marava leader, joined the Indian National Army under Subash Chandra Bose and began organizing the Forward Bloc against the Congress in the Tamil region.(24) The antagonism climaxed in a violent caste conflict in 1957. The Congress government arrested Muthuramalinga Thevar in connection with the riot. The DMK which had very little influence in the southern districts of Tamil Nadu at that time made a strategic intervention at this juncture in Maravar affairs. M.Karunanidhi, the only DMK candidate to be elected in the southern parts at that time, was chiefly responsible for co-opting the Maravar into the DMK; and for making the culture of the Tamil military castes a dominant and essential component of Tamilian national identity.
For many years, until he became chief minister, Karunanidhi wrote under the pen-name Maravan. His weekly letter to party cadres was known as Maravan Madal (25) – the Maravan’s epistle. Tamil militarism thus became integral to the Dravidian movement. The secessionist militancy of the DMK in the [nineteen] fifties and early [nineteen] sixties wad dominated by the vocabulary of Tamil militarism. This was the nadir of the Dravidian movement’s impact on Sri Lankan Tamils. DMK branches were organized in many parts of the north, east and the hill country. It was during this period that ayoung student named Kathamuthu Sivanandan from Amirthakazhi, a small village near the Batticaloa town who was studying in Tamil Nadu took part in the militant agitations of the DMK. Karunanidhi described him as “the appropriate weapon for Tamil upheaval.”(26). The student who was later known as Kasi Anandan wrote for a fortnightly called Dhee Mu Ka (DMK) (27) when he came back to Sri Lanka. In it appeared his poem, ‘The Maravar clan’- Maravar kulam (28):
“The Tamil army is a Maravar Army…
the enraged Tamils are a Tiger Army (Pulippadai)…”
These lines of the poem are now part of the history and myths of the Tamil Tigers’ genesis
I— SOURCES OF VIIAYANAGAR HISTORY.
[Price, 4 rtipes 8 annas.\
SOURCES OF VIJAYANAGAR HISTORY
SELECTED AND EDITED EOK THE
UNIVERSITY
BY
S. KRISHNASWAMI AYYANGAR, m.a.,
Professor of Indian History and Archceology and Fellow of the
University of Madras.
PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF MADRAS.
1919.
https://archive.org/details/sourcesofvijayan00krisrich
https://archive.org/details/sourcesofvijayan00krisrich
அச்சுதராய அப்யுக்தம் சொல்லும் நரச நாயக்கர் மானபூசனன் என்னும் மறவனாகிய பாண்டியனை வீழ்த்தி மதுரையை கைப்பற்றிய செய்தி.
மானபூசனன் மானக்கவசன் இவை யாவும் தென்காசிப்பாண்டியரின் பெயர்கள் மற்றும் கொற்க்கை வேந்தரான பாண்டியர்கள்.
மானபூசனப் பாண்டியன் = மானத்தை அனியாக அனிந்த மறக்குல பாண்டியன்
Achyuta-Raya-abhyudayam begins with his coronation, when
that son was anointed in the Yauva-Rajya (heir apparentcy) at the
same time. This authority may be followed as being the nearest
to Narasa, among the works that describe his early career. After
the affair against the Sultan of Bidar, he is said to have carried on
the campaign against the Telugu country. This was very likely
in the company of Saluva Narasimha against the Gajapati of
Kalinga and the Bahmani Sultan in the north. Then he is said to
have gone to the south against the Chola country. It may be that
in this part of the campaign as well he accompanied his master,
but there are specific achievements ascribed to him in this
campaign which are not mentioned in the various accounts relating
to Saluva Narasimha. He is said to have marched against
Madura, defeated the Chola, perhaps killed a Pandya, who is
called Manabhusha in one, and simply Marava in another. He is
then said to have marched northwards to Seringapatam where he
defeated the Heuna, governor or general, at the place, and took
possession of the island, having constructed a bridge, when the
river was in floods, to cross it. He is then said to have marched
westwards from there through a few places which are not identi-
fiable, to Gokarna on the West Coast. His having gone to
Ramesvaram might have been in the company of Saluva Nara-
simha or by himself alone. According to the order of campaigns
set forth in this account he must have been on the banks of the
Godavari in 1475 with his master. It may be then that he marched
southwards in the company of his master. The circumstances
necessitating a campaign against Madura must then have arisen,
and he must have been deputed on that commission.
அச்சுதராய அப்யுகதம்
கூறும் தென்காசி பாண்டியன் மானபூசனன் என்னும் மறவனை பற்றி
"மதுரா மகேசம் மறவாய தத்வம்"
"மானபூசனன்" என்னும் ஐடிலவர்மன் பராக்கிரம பாண்டியனையே இந்த நரசநாயக்கன் வென்றான். "மானபூசன்னை" துரத்திய பிறகு நரசநாயக்கன் மதுரையை உறங்காவில்லிதான் திருமாலிஞ்சோலை வாணாதிராயருக்கு அளித்தான் என சரித்திரம் கூறுகின்றது. இதன் பிறகே மதுரை வாணாதிராயர் வசமானது.(பாண்டிய நாட்டில் வாணாதிராயர்: தொல்லியல் துறை இயக்குனர் வெ.வேதாச்சலம்.)
எனவே மானபூசன்னன் என்னும் மறவனை வென்றே மதுரையை கைப்பற்றினான் நரசநாயக்கன். எனவே மதுரையை ஆண்டது வாணாதிராயர் அல்ல.
ஆனால் கல்தோன்றி மண்தோன்றாக்காலத்தே வாளோடு முன் தோன்றிய மூத்தக்குடி என்னும் முதுமொழிக்கு ஏற்ப பல அரசுகள் மறவரில் தோன்றின. இருக்கு வேளிர் பல கல்வெட்டு மறவர் என வந்துள்ளது. சேர அரசர் பழுவேட்டரையர், மலையமான் , தொண்டைமான்,விழுப்பேரரையர் இவர்களுடன் வாணர்களும் மறக்குடியினரே. இவர்கள் மறவரில் ஒரு அங்கமே.
கூறும் தென்காசி பாண்டியன் மானபூசனன் என்னும் மறவனை பற்றி
"மதுரா மகேசம் மறவாய தத்வம்"
"மானபூசனன்" என்னும் ஐடிலவர்மன் பராக்கிரம பாண்டியனையே இந்த நரசநாயக்கன் வென்றான். "மானபூசன்னை" துரத்திய பிறகு நரசநாயக்கன் மதுரையை உறங்காவில்லிதான் திருமாலிஞ்சோலை வாணாதிராயருக்கு அளித்தான் என சரித்திரம் கூறுகின்றது. இதன் பிறகே மதுரை வாணாதிராயர் வசமானது.(பாண்டிய நாட்டில் வாணாதிராயர்: தொல்லியல் துறை இயக்குனர் வெ.வேதாச்சலம்.)
எனவே மானபூசன்னன் என்னும் மறவனை வென்றே மதுரையை கைப்பற்றினான் நரசநாயக்கன். எனவே மதுரையை ஆண்டது வாணாதிராயர் அல்ல.
ஆனால் கல்தோன்றி மண்தோன்றாக்காலத்தே வாளோடு முன் தோன்றிய மூத்தக்குடி என்னும் முதுமொழிக்கு ஏற்ப பல அரசுகள் மறவரில் தோன்றின. இருக்கு வேளிர் பல கல்வெட்டு மறவர் என வந்துள்ளது. சேர அரசர் பழுவேட்டரையர், மலையமான் , தொண்டைமான்,விழுப்பேரரையர் இவர்களுடன் வாணர்களும் மறக்குடியினரே. இவர்கள் மறவரில் ஒரு அங்கமே.
Of these Narasimha
was famous for his heroic deeds even from his youth. He
captured the fort of Manava (Manuva ?) Durga from its Muham-
madan ruler and gave it back to him. He laid a bridge across the
Kaveri and captured the town of Seringapatam. He then marched
against Madura and, defeating and killing its Marava ruler in a
battle, captured the place. He then defeated in battle a chief called
Konetiraja who opposed him with his elephant hordes. He made
the city of Vidyaoura his capital. He had three queens who were
called Tippamba, Nagamamba and Obamamba. Of these by his
wife Tippamba he got a son called Vlra-Narasimha, by Naga-
mamba Krishna Raya and by Obamamba, Achyuta Raya.
ACHYUTARAYABHYUDAYAM lOQ
But the Parijatapaharanam dedicated to Krishnaraya says that Narasa killed
the Chola. We cannot say which of the versions is correct.
t The ruler of Madura is according to this account said to have submitted to
Narasa without fighting and to have made him valuable presents. But the copperplates
of his successors and the Achyutarayabhyudayam give a different version. According to
the Achyutarayabhyudayam he captured Madura after killing in battle its Marava ruler.
Again inscriptions say that he captured it from a king called Manabhusha. This Mana-
bhusha has been identified with Arikesari Parakrama Pandya surnamed also as Mana-
bharana and Manakavacha of the Tenkasi Pandyas. The Achyutarayabhyudayam again
says that Narasa defeated a chief called Konetiraja who opposed him with his elephant
hordes. We do not know who this chief was. Konetiraja is perhaps a corruption of the
title Konerinmaikondan which is one of the titles of Perumal Parakrama Pandyadeva
alias Kulasekhara. (Travancore Archaeological Series I, p. 104.) But he succeeded to
power only in SS. 1464 or AD. 1542-3. Therefore the term Konetiraya of the Achyuta-
rayabhyudayam cannot refer to him. There were others that have had the same title
and the present reference might be to one of them. No. 259 of 191 1, in Kumbhakonam,
of AD. 1490-I, refers to a Konetiraja of Kanch I
Since the campaign of Kumara Kampana, Madura seems to
have been at least nominally under the empire. The two famous
brothers Lakkanna and Madanna were respectively governors of
Madura and the Chola country under Dgva Raya II. The former
10 SOURCES OF VIJAYANAGAR HISTORY
had for his sphere of office ' the Lordship of the Southern Ocean *
along with the governorship of Madura when he was promoted
from the middle division, Deva Raya's brother-in-law Saluva
Tippa taking his place there. What happened in the Pandya
country after Lakkanna left Madura to go to headquarters is not
quite clear. There are inscriptions of a few chieftains whose
titles were Vanadi Rayar and their inscriptions range from A.D.
1453 to 1476 or thereabouts. In all likelihood the province of
Madura was organized by Lakkanna, and these Bana chieftains
whose original homes should have been in the North Afcot district
were put in charge of various localities as sub-governors under
him. They perhaps attempted to make themselves indepen-
dent when the troubles in the empire assumed great dimensions
under Virupaksha. It may be something like this that called for
the active intervention of the imperial general Narasa Nayaka.
There is another alternative possible ; it may be that the Pandyas,
who had practically retired into the Tinnevelly district by now,
attempted to regain their former position in the Madura district.
This would account for the defeat of the Pandya king Manabhusha
as some of the inscriptions state. We have a Manabharana among
the Pandyans whose descendants were associated with Tenkasi,
a city founded by one of them. What provision he made for carry-
ing on the administration of Madura after he left, we have no
means of knowing. But obviously there was no trouble in that
frontier till we come to late in the reign of Krishnadeva Raya.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.