ARE THE PAEIARS (PAREIYAS)
OF SOUTHERN INDIA
DRAVIDIANS ?
It has been commonly supposed
by Anglo-Indians, that certain tribes
and castes inhabiting Southern
India, especially the Pareiyas, Pallas,
Puleiyas, and similar tribes,
belong to a different race from the mass of
the inhabitants. The higher
castes are styled Hindus, or else Tamilians,
Malayalis, &c., according
to their language and nation ; but those
names are withheld from
some of the ruder and more primitive tribes,
and from the Pareiyas and
other agricultural slaves. As this supposition,
and the use of words to
which it has given rise, are frequently
met with both in conversation
and in books, it seems desirable to
inquire whether, and to
what extent, this opinion may be regarded as
correct.
ARE THE PAREIYAS OF SOUTHERN
INDIA DRAVIDIANS ? 541
It is necessary here to
premise some remarks on the meaning of the
term Hindil. This term
is used in India in a variety of ways, but its
most common, as well as
its best authorised meaning, is that of an
adherent of the system
of religion called Hinduism. It is true that
this use of the term is
liable to serious objection, inasmuch as the term
Hindu originally meant,
and ought still to mean, an Indian—an inhabitant
of India—irrespective of
the religion to which he belonged. It
seems hardly fair to use
a term which in itself has not a theological,
but a geographical meaning,
to denote the adherents of one out of
several religions which
prevail in the region to which the term applies.
There is no such inconsistency
pertaining to the use of the terms
Buddhist, Jaina, Muhammedan,
or Christian. Notwithstanding this,
in consequence of the difficulty
of finding any other convenient term
to denote the
followers of the Brahraanical religion, or the religion of
the Vedas and Puranas,
and also in consequence of the followers of
this religion forming the
great majority of the inhabitants of India,
people have been led to
adopt the national name as a term of religious
nomenclature. This meaning
has been made authoritative by its use
in official documents,
and by a decision of one of the courts, to the
effect that the term Hindtis,
as used in the ' Indian Succession Act,' is
meant to denote the adherents
of the religion called Hinduism, in consequence
of which Indian Christians
are declared not to be Hindtis in
the meaning of the
Act. This being the case, it seems to have become
desirable that the term
Hindii should now cease to be used in any
other sense. Consistency
in the use of terms is of more importance
than accuracy of etymology.
It may, therefore, be admitted—using
the word in this sense—that
the Tudas, the Khonds, and many of the
Gonds are not Hindus, and
also that some of the predatory wandering
tribes are probably
not Hindus ; though, geographically, they have all
as much right to the name
of HindU as the Brahmans themselves. In
some of these cases, however,
it would be safer to say merely that such
and such classes are not
regarded as orthodox Hindtis. As for the
Pareiyas and the lower
castes generally in the more civilised districts
of the country, they are
Hindus by religion, like the rest of the community.
The Brahmans and the
Pareiyas equally worship Siva and
Vishnu, and therefore are
equally Hindtis. The differences between
them pertain to caste,
not to religion.
Many persons,
especially in Northern India, have been accustomed
to use the term Hindti
as synonymous with Aryan. They call the
Brahmans and the
higher castes of Northern India Hindtis, but withhold
the name from the aboriginal
races. This seems an improper use
of words, inasmuch as it
denationalises not only the low-caste inhabi542
APPENDIX.
tants of the northern provinces
and the rude forest tribes of Central
India, but also the whole
of the Dravidian inhabitants of the Peninsula ;
notwithstanding the
proofs that exist that they crossed the Sind, Hind,
or Ind-tis, and occupied
the Sapta Sindhu, or ' country of the seven
rivers'—the Vaidik name
of India, as far as India was at that time
known—before the arrival
of the Aryans, and that they have therefore
a better claim to be called
Hind-us than the Aryans themselves. To
deprive the Dravidians
and other primitive races of the name of Hindu,
seems as unjust as it would
be to deprive all persons of Anglo-Saxon
descent of the name of
Englishman, and to restrict that name to the
descendants of Norman families.
Some again mix the two
meanings^—the religious and the ethnological
—together, and thus,
as it appears to me, produce inextricable confusion.
Thus Mr Beanies, in a
note to the Introduction to his '•' Comparative
Grammar of the Aryan Vernaculars
of Northern India," p. 39, says,
" For the
information of readers in Europe it may be necessary to
explain that the word Hindi!
is always used in India as a religious
term, denoting those Aryans
who still adhere to the Brahmanical
fiiith, and who in most
parts of India constitute the majority of the
population." I should
have considered this definition perfectly correct
if the word Aryans had
been omitted ; but as it stands, it either
includes Dravidians amongst
Aryans, contrary, I believe, to Mr
Beames's own opinion, or
it refuses the name of Hindil to those
Dravidians in Madras
and elsewhere, who consider themselves, and are
generally considered by
others, amongst the most orthodox and zealous
Hindus in India. In
Southern India, Dravidians are invariably called
Hindis in public documents
; and the University of Madras divides
candidates for its honours
amongst the Hindu community into two
classes only, Brahmans
and ' other Hindus ; ' by the term, other Hindus,
denoting all persons
'not Brahmans' who are adherents of tlie Hindu
religion. Notwithstanding
this, in Southern India itself the term
Hindu has sometimes
been restricted to the higher castes, and denied
to the Pareiyas and other
castes supposed to hold an inferior place in
the social system. In this
classification the term high-caste, without
distinction of Aryan or
Dravidian, occupies the place of the word
Aryan in Mr Beames's definition.
This restriction of the name of
Hindu to those of the
higher castes who adhere to the Brahmanical
religion prevails chiefly,
as might be expected, amongst persons who
belong to the higher castes
themselves, but Europeans have sometimes
fallen into the same style
of expression. For instance, in regard to
the Shanars, a tribe
in Tinnevelly, a considerable proportion of the
members of which have become
Christians, it has sometimes been said
ARE THE PAREIYAS OF SOUTHERN
INDIA DRAVIDIANS ? 543
by Europeans that tbey
are ' not Hindtls.* This style of expression is
owing, I believe, to a
misapprehension, inasmuch as the Shanars, in
their ori^^inal condition,
before their reception of Christianity, were
adherents of the
ordinary Hindil religion, though generally it was a
low type of that
religion which they followed. They were certainly not
Aryans, except on the
supposition that all Dravidians are Aryans, but
in this respect they
were only in the same predicament as the rest of
the Tamil castes, whether
higher or lower. The practice of demonolatry
does not make a man cease
to be a Hindu by religion, the demonolatry
of the aborigines having
been incorporated with the worship of E-udra
from very early, if not
even from Vaidik times. The greater number
of the Buddhists in Ceylon
are demonolaters—the origin of demonolatry
in Ceylon and India
being no doubt the same ; yet, though
demonolatry is further
removed from Buddhism than from Hinduism,
we do not think of saying
that the Singhalese are not Buddhists.
There is an element of
recognised demonism in the Saivism of every
part of India, in some
places more, in others less. It is a question
only of less or more ;
and the adherents of the more, as well as of the
less are Hindus. The notion
that the Shanars are not Hindus is a
notion unknown to the Hindus
themselves. By the Hindus they are
regarded as simply one
caste out of many. We must now, however,
bring this digression to
an end, and resume our inquiry respecting the
relationship of the
Pareiyas.
The Pareiyas (called
in Telugu Malavaiidlu = Malas) are not the only
caste or class of people
in the Dravidian parts of India, who are commonly
regarded as outcasts, nor
are they the lowest or most degraded
of those classes ; but
partly because they are the most numerous servile
tribe (their numbers
amounting in some places to so much as a fifth of
the population), and partly
because they are more frequently brought
into contact with Europeans
than any similar class, in consequence of
the majority of the domestic
servants of Europeans throughout the
Madras Presidency
being Pareiyas, they have come to be regarded by
some persons as the low-caste
race of Southern India. Hence, besides
the above-mentioned discrepancies
in the application of the name HindCl,
there are various errors
afloat respecting the origin of the Pareiyas and
their position in the caste
scale, which require to be noticed before
entering on the
question now to be discussed, ' Are the Pareiyas Dravidians
%
'
Europeans were generally
led to suppose, on their arrival in India
several generations ago,
that the Pareiyas were either the illegitimate
offspring of adulterous
intercourse, or were persons who had been
excluded from caste
for their crimes. This notion appears to have
644 APPENDIX.
been invented and propagated
by tlie Bralimans and tlie higher castes,
and must have originated,
in part, in their wish to justify their exclusive,
unsocial behaviour
towards the Pareiyas, on principles which they
supposed that Europeans
would approve. In part, also, it may have
originated in an error
arising from the uncritical habit of the Hindu
mind—viz., the error
of transferring to Southern India and to the
Dravidian tribes, the fictions
which were devised in Northern India to
account for the origin
of the new castes, or so called mixed classes, of
the North. Those northern
castes or classes seem to have come into
being through the
operation of two causes ; first, through the subdivision
of the original castes
of Vaisyas and servile or Sudra Aryans,
in accordance with the
progressive subdivision of labour ; and secondly,
through the
introduction of one aboriginal tribe after another within
the pale of Aryan civilisation,
as the religion and civil polity of the
Sanskrit-speaking race
spread throughout the country, and as the
primitive inhabitants were
transformed from Dasyus, Nishadas, and
Mlechchas, into Sudras.
In Manu and similar S'astras, no mention is
made of either of these
causes ; but the new or mixed castes are attributed
exclusively to fictitious
mixtures of the older castes. The more
respectable of the new
castes are attributed to the legal intermarriage
of persons belonging to
different castes of recognised respectability
;
another and inferior set
of castes are attributed to the adulterous
intercourse of persons
of equal respectability, but of dififerent caste, or
of high-caste men with
low-caste women ; whilst the lowest castes of
all are represented to
have sprung from the adulterous intercourse of
high-caste women with low-caste
men, and are said also to constitute
the receptacle of persons
who had been socially excommunicated for
offences against their
caste.
Whatever amount of truth
may be contained in this representation
of the origin of the castes
of Northern India (and I think it most
probably a fiction throughout),
it may confidently be affirmed that the
Dravidian castes had
no such origin. The only 'mixed caste' known
in Southern India, is that
which consists of the children of the dancing
girls attached to the
temples. Of this class the female children are
brought up in the
profession of their mothers, the males as temple
florists and musicians.
In all ordinary cases, when children are born
out of wedlock, if there
is no great disparity in rank or caste between
the parents, the rule is
that the caste of the child is that of the less
lionourable of the two
castes to which its parents belong. Where
considerable disparity
exists, and where the dereliction of rank is on
the woman's side—as, for
example, where a high-caste woman, or even
a woman belonging to the
middling castes, has formed an intimacy
ARE THE PAREIYAS OF SOUTHERN
INDIA DRAVIDIANS ? 545
with a Pareiya man, neither
the caste of the father nor any other caste
has much chance of
being recruited or polluted by the addition of the
woman's illegitimate offspring.
The child rarely sees the light; the
mother either procures
an abortion or commits suicide. To suppose,
therefore, as Europeans
have sometimes been led to suppose, that the
entire caste of Pareiyas
(including its siibdivisions, and the ' left hand
'
castes corresponding to
it) has come into existence in the surreptitious
manner described
above, or that it is composed of persons who have
been excluded from other
castes for their crimes, is a baseless dream,
which seems too
preposterous for serious refutation. Though it is probable
that it was from the
statements of natives that the Anglo-Indian
community originally derived
this notion, yet I never met with any
natives, learned or unlearned,
by whom the notion appeared to be
entertained ; and the
Pareiyas themselves, who regard their lowly caste
with feelings of pride
and affection, which are very different from what
might be expected of them,
would resent this representation of their
origin, if they had ever
heard of it, with indignation.
Anglo-Indians who are not
acquainted with the vernacular languages,
often designate
Pareiyas as outcasts, as persons who are
without caste, or as persons
who have no caste to lose. It is true
that the Pareiya
servants of Europeans will sometimes vaunt that they
belong to ' master's caste
;
' and some masters are
said to have found
to their cost that their
Pareiya servants practise no scrupulous, superstitious
distinctions respecting
meats and drinks. Notwithstanding
this, to suppose that
the Pareiyas have literally no caste, is undoubtedly
an error. The Pareiyas
constitute a well-defined, distinct, ancient
caste, independent of every
other; and the Pareiya caste has subdivisions
of its own, its own peculiar
usages, its own traditions, and
its own jealousy of the
encroachments of the castes which are above
it and below it. They constitute,
perhaps, the most numerous caste
in the Tamil country. In
the city of Madras they number twenty-one
per cent, of the Hindu
population ; the Vellalas, who come next to
them, numbering fourteen
per cent. Though the Pareiyas themselves
will admit that they
belong—or, as they would prefer to say, that
they belong at present—to
the lowest division of castes, and are not
fabled to have sprung
from even the least noble part of BrahmS,;
nevertheless, they are
not the lowest of the castes comprised in this
lowest division. I am acquainted
with several castes in various parts
of the Tamil country, which
are considered lower than the Pareiyas in
the social scale ; and
in this enumeration I do not include the Pallas,
a caste between whom and
the Pareiyas there is an unsettled dispute
respecting precedence.
The treatment which the Pareiyas receive from
2 M
546 APPENDIX.
the castes above them,
is doubtless unjust and indefensible ; but it is
not generally known by
those Europeans who sympathise in the
wrongs of the
Pareiyas, that, whenever they have an opportunity, the
Pareiyas deal out the
very same treatment to the members of castes
which are inferior to
their own
—
e.g., the caste of shoemakers,
and the
lowest caste of washermen
; that they are, equally with the higher
castes, filled with that
compound of pride of birth, exclusiveness, and
jealousy, called ' caste
feeling
;
' and that there is no
contest for precedence
amongst the higher castes
of longer standing, or of a more
bitter character, than
that which is carried on between the Pareiyas
and the Pallas. In the
insane dispute about pre-eminence, which is
always being carried on
in Southern India between the ' right hand
'
and the ' left hand ' castes,
the Pareiyas range themselves on the right
hand, the Pallas on the
left ; and it is chiefly by these two castes that
the fighting part of the
controversy is carried on. Now that Europeans
are better acquainted
with Indian affairs, the theory of the illegitimate
origin of the Pareiyas
is more rarely found to be entertained ; and, as
the study of the
native languages extends, the supposition that they
are outcasts, or that they
have no caste, will soon disappear likewise.
The question before us
having been cleared of popular errors and
extraneous matter, we
now come to the consideration of that question
itself. Are the
Pareiyas Dravidians % Are the forest tribes, the lower
castes, and the so-called
'outcasts,' that speak the Dravidian languages,
especially the Tamil Pariahs
(properly Pareiyas), the Telugu
Malas, and the Malayalam
Puleiyas (who may be taken as the representatives
of the class), of the same
origin and of the same race as the
Dravidians of the
higher castes? Whilst both classes have a right
to be called Hindiis,
are the higher castes alone Dravidians, Tamilians,
Malayans, &c. ? and
are the Pareiyas and people of similar castes to
be regarded as belonging
to a different race 1
On the whole, I think it
more probable that the Pareiyas are Dravidians
; nevertheless, the
supposition that they belong to a different
race, that they are descended
from the true aborigines of the country
—a race older than the
Dravidians themselves—-and that they were
reduced by the first Dravidians
to servitude, is not destitute of probability.
It may be conceived
that as the Aryans were preceded by the
Dravidians, so the Dravidians
may have been preceded by an older,
ruder, and perhaps blacker
race, of whom the Doms and other Chandalas
of Northern India, and
the Pareiyas, and other low tribes of the
Peninsula, are the
surviving representatives. If this primitive race
existed prior to the arrival
of the Dravidians, it would naturally
happen that some of them
would take refuge from the intruders in
ARE THE PAREIYAS OF SOUTHERN
INDIA DRAVIDIANS ? 647
mountain ftistnesses and
pestilential jungles—like the Rajis or D6ms
of the Himalayas, the Weddas
of Ceylon, and the Mala-(y)-ara8as of
the Southern Ghauts; whilst
others, probably the majority of the
race, would be reduced
to perpetual servitude, like the Pareiyas,
Puleiyas, and Pallas. The
history of the subjection of the Prae-Aryan
S'udras of Northern India,
would thus form the counterpart and supplement
of the history of the
subjection of a still older race. Though,
however, all this may be
conceived to be possible, and though there
may not be any ^ priori
improbability in it, it is more to the purpose
to state such circumstances
and considerations as appear to be adducible
in its support.
(1.) The Pareiyas, the
Pallas, the Puleiyas, and several other lowcaste
tribes, are generally slaves
to the higher castes, and most of them
appear always to have
been in an enslaved condition ; and it is more
natural to suppose that
they were reduced to a servile condition by
conquest, than to
sup"pose that entire tribes were enslaved by the
operation of ordinary social
causes. If, then, the castes referred to
were a subjugated people,
they must have settled in the country at
an earlier period than
their conquerors, and probably belonged to a
different race.
(2.) The low-caste
inhabitants of Southern India are distinguished
from the entire circle
of the higher castes by clear, unmistakable marks
of social helotry. The
title of 'S'Mra,' which has generally been
assumed by the higher castes,
or which was conferred upon them by
the Brahmans, is withheld
from the low-caste tribes; they are not
allowed to enter
within the precincts of the temples of the Dii majorum
gentium; and wherever old
Hindii usages survive unchecked, as in the
native protected states
of Travancore and Cochin, the women belonging
to those castes are prohibited
(or were, till lately) from wearing
their ' cloth ' over their
shoulders, and obliged to leave the entire bust
uncovered, in token of
social inferiority. It may be argued, that
broadly marked class distinctions
like the above-mentioned, which
separate the people of
ten or twenty different castes or tribes from
the rest of the
population, are incompatible with the supposition of an
original identity of race.
(3.) There are various
traditions current amongst the Pareiyas to
the effect that the position
which their caste occupied in native society
at some former period was
very different from what it is now, and
much more honourable. Wilks
observes that there is a tradition that
the Canarese Pareiyas were
once an independent people, with kings of
their own. The Tamil
Papiyas sometimes boast that at an ancient
period tlieirs was the
most distinguished caste in the country. They
548 APPENDIX.
say that they were
reduced to their present position, as a punishment
for the haughty behaviour
of their ancestors to some ancient king ; on
which occasion the Vellalas,
or caste of cultivators, who are now
called Tamirar, or Tamilians,
par excellence, were raised to the place
which had previously been
occupied by themselves. There is a similar
tradition that the Kuravas,
or gipsy basket-makers, were once kings
of the hill country in
the south.
(4.) In various parts
of the country Pareiyas and members of similar
castes enjoy peculiar
privileges, especially at religious festivals. Thus,
at the annual festival
of Egdttdl, the only mother—a form of K§,li,
and the tutelary goddess
of the ' Black town ' of Madras—when a tdli,
or bridal necklace (answering
to our wedding-ring), was tied round the
neck of the idol in the
name of the entire community, a Pareiya used
to be chosen to represent
the people as the goddess's bridegroom.
Similar privileges are
claimed by Pareiyas in other parts of the country,
especially at the worship
of divinities of the inferior class, such as the
village ammds, or
mothers, and the guardians of boundaries ; and these
peculiar rights, which
are conceded to them by the higher castes, may
be supposed to amount to
an acknowledgment of their ancient importance
; like the privileges claimed
at the coronation of Rajput princes
by the Bhills, a northern
race of aborigines. It has always been the
policy of Hindu rulers
to confer a few empty privileges upon injured
races as a cheap
compensation for injuries ; and it has generally been
found, where an inquiry
has been made, that such privileges possess an
historical
signification. Mr Walhouse, in an article entitled " Archaeological
Notes," in the Bombay
Antiquary for July 1874, adds a few
instances of the privileges
enjoyed by the lower castes. "At Melkotta,
the chief seat of the
followers of R^m^nuja Achdrya, and at the Brahman
temple at Bailur, the Holeyars
or Pareyars have the right of entering
the temple on three days
in the year, specially set apart for them.
In the great festival of
Siva at Trivalur, in Tanjor, the head man of the
Pareyars is mounted on
the elephant with the god, and carries his
chaiiri. In Madras, too
" [in addition to the custom mentioned above
by myself], " the
mercantile caste, and in Vizagapatam the Brahmans,
had to go through the form
of asking the consent of the lowest castes
to their marriages, though
the custom has now died out." The principle
underlying these customs
is thus explained :—" It is well known,"
he says, " that
the servile castes in Southern India once held far higher
positions, and were
indeed masters of the land on the arrival of the
Brahmanical races. Many
curious vestiges of their ancient power still
survive in the shape of
certain privileges, which are jealously cherished,
and, their origin being
forgotten, are much misunderstood. These
ARE THE PAREIYAS OF SOUTHERN
INDIA DRAVIDIANS ? 549
privileges are remarkable
instances of survivals from an extinct order
of society—shadows of a
long-departed supremacy, bearing witness to
a period when the
present haughty high-caste races were suppliants
before the ancestors
of degraded classes whose touch is now regarded
as pollution."
(5.) The strongest argument
which can be adduced in support of the
Prse-Dravidian origin
of the Pareiyas and similar castes, consists in the
circumstance that the
national name of Tamilians, Malayalis, Kannadis,
<fcc., is withheld from
them by the usus loquendi of the Dravidian
languages, and conferred
exclusively upon the higher castes. When a
person is called a Tamiran,
or Tamilian, it is meant that he is neither a
Brahman nor a member of
any of the inferior castes, but a Dravidian
Sudra. The name is understood
to denote, not the language which is
spoken by the person referred
to, but the nation to which he belongs
;
and as the lower castes
are never denoted by this national name, it
would seem to be
implied that they do not belong to the nation,
though they speak its language,
but belong, like the Tamil-speaking
Brahmans and Muhammedans,
to a different race.
I may here mention an
argument occasionally urged in support of
the same view of the case,
which is founded, I believe, upon an error.
It has been said that
the name Pareiya, or Pariah, is synonymous with
that of the Paharias (from
pahdr, a hill), a race of mountaineers, properly
called Meiers,
inhabiting the Bajmahjil Hills, in Bengal; and
hence it is argued that
the Pareiyas may be considered, like the Paharias,
as a race of non-Aryan,
non-Dravidian aborigines. It is an
error, however, to suppose
that there is any connection between those
two names. The word Pariah,
properly Pareiya, denotes not a mountaineer,
but a drummer, a word regularly
derived from parei, a drum,
especially the great drum
used at funerals. The name Pareiya is, in
fact, the name of a
hereditary occupation, the Pareiyas being the class
of people who are generally
employed at festivals, and especially at
funerals, as drummers.
It is true that their numbers are now so great
that many of them are never
so employed, and that the only employment
of the great majority is
that of agricultural labourers ; but whenever
and wherever the din
of the parei happens to be heard we may be
assured that a Pareiya
is the person who is engaged in beating it. As
the whole ca^te, though
perhaps the most numerous in the circle of the
low-castes, is denominated
by this name, it appears probable that originally
drumming was their
principal employment.
The origin of the term
Mdla, applied to the Telugu Pareiyas, is
uncertain. Mdl means bl^ck
in Tamil, but the corresponding word in
Telugu is not mdl, but
nalla. The Pur^nas speak of a tribe of bar550
APPENDIX.
barians called Malas, but
tbeir location has been considered doubtful.
I should be inclined
to identify the Puranic name with that of the
Meiers, the primitive hill
people of the Kajmahal hills; it seems
hazardous, however, to
attribute the same origin to the name of the
Telugu Pareiyas. Mr C.
P. Brown suggests, but does not adopt, the
derivation of the name
from the Telugu verb mdl-utdi, to be without,
the meaning deducible from
which, * the destitute,' would seem to suit
the circumstances of the
case. The name of the Malayalam PulaycLS
(Tarn. Puleiyas), is derived
from pula, flesh, pollution ; but the ultimate
root seems to be pul, little.
The caste which is considered the
lowest in the Malayalam
country, perhaps the lowest in any of the
Dravidian provinces, is
that of the N^y^dis, or Nayaclis, a race of
dwellers in the jungles.
N4yMi means one who hunts with dogs;
N^yadi, an eater of
dogs. The members of this caste are required to
retire seventy-two steps
from high-caste people, Pulayas thirty-six,
Kaiiiyars twenty-four.
It seems difficult to suppose that tribes which
are now regarded as so
degraded belonged originally to the same race
as the higher castes themselves
; but the difficulty, though one tha£'
requires careful
consideration, may not be found to be insuperable. The
circumstances and
arguments that have now been alleged in favour of
the non-Dravidian origin
of the lower castes, possess undoubtedly a
considerable degree of
strength ; but I proceed to show that they are
not perfectly
conclusive, and that they are to some extent counterbalanced
by considerations
adducible on the other side.
(1.) The argument
which is drawn from the servile condition of the
Pareiyas fails to
establish the conclusion : because it is certain that
there are many slaves
in various parts of the world who do not differ
from their masters in race,
though they do in status. The Eussian
serfs were Slavonians,
and the Magyar serfs Magyars, equally with their
masters. Illustrations
of the inconclusiveness of the argument may be
drawn also from Dravidian
life. The more wealthy of the Sh^nars—
a
caste inhabiting the extreme
south—have slaves in their employment,
some of whom belong to
a subdivision of the Shanar caste. These servile
Shanars appear to have
been slaves from a very early period ; and
yet they are admitted
even by their masters to belong to the same race
as themselves. There are
also servile subdivisions of some other castes.
Thus, a portion of the
Maravas of the southern provinces are slaves to
the Poligars, or Marava
chieftains; and even of the Vellalas, or
Tamilian cultivators, there
are not a few families who are slaves to the
temples. Various circumstances
might contribute to the reduction of
the Pareiyas, &c.,
to servitude, irrespective of difference or inferiority
of race. In the wars of
barbarous nations, it often happens that both
ARE THE PAREIYAS OF SOUTHERN
INDIA DRAVIDIANS ? 651
conquerors and conquered
belong to tlie same race, and even to the
same tribe. In a civilised
age, the conquerors may be content with
governing and taxing
the conquered ; but in a ruder age, and especially
in a tropical climate,
where labour is distasteful, the vanquished are
ordinarily reduced to the
condition of slaves. In such cases we shall
meet with a phenomenon
exactly parallel to that of the Pareiyas—viz.,
a servile tribe speaking
the language and exhibiting the physiological
peculiarities of their
masters, and yet separated from them by an
impassable barrier. Other
causes, however, in addition to that of war
may have been in
operation, such as poverty, or a state of society
resembling the feudal
system, or even a trade in slaves, like that which
in Africa sets not
only nation against nation, but village against village.
At all events, taking into
account the probability that these and similar
social evils may have existed
at an early period, it does not seem more
difficult to account for
the enslaved condition of the Pareiyas, without
supposing them to have
been of a different race from their masters, than
it is to account for the
serfdom, till lately, of the Russian peasantry, or
for the existence of slavery
amongst nearly all the primitive Indo-European
races, without the
help of any such supposition. It is worthy of
notice also, that
whilst the Pareiyas, Pallas, and Puleiyas are generally
slaves, some of the castes
that are included in the lower division
—
including some of the very
lowest—consist wholly of freemen.
(2.) The traditions that
have been mentioned respecting the honourable
position formerly occupied
by the Pareiyas, do not establish the
point in hand. Supposing
them to rest (which they do not appear to
do) on an historical foundation,
they prove, not an original difference
of race, but only the -ancient
freedom of the Pareiyas, and the respectability
of their social rank,
before their reduction to slavery.
(3.) The circumstance
that the entire circle of the lower castes,
including the Pareiyas,
are separated from the higher by badges of
social distinction, and
denied the national names of Tamilian, Malayali,
&c., is one which must
be admitted to possess great weight. Though
the argument which may
be deduced from this circumstance is a very
strong one, it does not
appear to be absolutely conclusive, for it is in
accordance with the
genius of Hindti legislation to punish poverty by
civil and social disabilities
; and high-caste pride might naturally take
the shape of an.
exclusive appropriation even of the national name.
We find a parallel use
of words in the Sanskrit S'astras, in which
nations that are admitted
in those S'astras to be of Kshatriya origin
{e.g., the Yavanas and
Chinas), are termed Mlechchas, not in consequence
of difference of ra^e,
but solely in consequence of their disuse
of Brahmanical rites. There
is a still closer parallel in the law of
552 APPENDIX.
Manu, that Brahmans who
took up their aJ)ode in the Dravidian country
—probably in Manu's time
an uncleared forest—should be regarded as
Mlechchas.
(4.) There does not seem
to be anything in the physiology of the
Pareiyas, in their
features, or in the colour of their skin, which warrants
us to suppose that they
belong to a different race from their high-caste
neighbours. The comparative
blackness of their complexion has led
some persons to suppose
them to be descended from a race of Negrito
aborigines ; but this hypothesis
seems to be unnecessary. The swarthiness
of the complexion not only
of the Pareiyas, but also of the
Puleiyas of the Malayalam
country (a still blacker caste), may be
accounted for by their
continual employment for many ages in the
open air, exposed to the
full force of the vertical sun. If the Fellahs,
or labourers, and Bedouins,
or wandering shepherds, of Egypt, are
admitted to be Arabs of
pure blood, notwithstanding the deep brown
of their complexion, it
would seem to be unnecessary to suppose the
Pareiyas, who labour in
a hotter sun than that of Egypt, to be of a
different race from the
rest of the Dravidians, in order to account for
their complexions
being a shade darker. In no country in the world
are features and complexion
so variable as in India ; but caste, as it
exists in India, and especially
as it affects the condition of the lower
classes, is unknown in
every other country in the world. Separate
for ever from the society
of their fellow-countrymen a class of agricultural
labourers or slaves : prohibit
all intermarriage with families in
more easy
circumstances : require them to live by themselves in
wretched wigwams,
removed to a considerable distance from the
village inhabited by the
respectable householders : compel them to
work hard the whole year
round in the open air in an inter-tropical
climate—in a country where
the sun comes twice in the year right
over head : let all possibility
of their rising to a higher condition of
life, or obtaining a more
sedentary, shady employment be for ever
precluded : prohibit
education : pay them no wages : feed them scantily
and clothe them still more
scantily : encourage drunkenness and the
eating of carrion : prohibit
the women from dressing themselves with
ordinary regard for decency
:—treat them, in short, for twenty centuries
as the Brahmans and high-caste
Dravidians have treated the Pareiyas
and other low-castes, and
it will be unnecessary to have recourse to the
theory of their intermixture
with a primitive race of Africans or
Negritoes in order to account
for the coarseness of their features, their
dwarfishness, or the
blackness of their skin. Notwithstanding all
this, though the
Pareiyas and Puleiyas, as a class, are darker than
any other class in the
South, we find amongst them almost as great
ARE THE PABEIYAS OF SOUTHERN
INDIA DRAVIDIANS ? 553
a variety of colour as
amongst other classes of Hindus ; and occasionally
we may notice complexions
that are as clear as those of the
higher castes, together
with considerable regularity of feature. When
Pareiyas have risen to
a position of competence and comfort, and
S'Cidras have become impoverished,
and been obliged to work hard in
the sun all day, their
complexion is affected as well as their social
position ; and in a few
generations the S'Mra is said to become dark,
the Pareiya fair.
I admit that the features
of the Pareiyas differ somewhat from those
of the high-caste VelMlas,
or cultivators, as the features of every caste
in India differ somewhat
from those of every other caste ; yet there is
no difference between the
cultivator and the Pareiya in the shape of
their heads. Not only from
their peculiarities of feature and dress,
but even from the shape
of their heads, we are generally able to distinguish
Tamilians or Telugus from
the Afghan or Turco-Tatar
Muhammedans of India. But
looking at the shape of their heads
alone, and leaving complexion
and features out of account, it is impossible
to distinguish a
Tamilian, or high-caste Dravidian, from a
Pareiya or any other member
of the lower castes. Difference in
feature is of little or
no account in this inquiry, for it is notorious
that castes which proceed
from the same origin differ from one another
both in features and in
mental characteristics, as widely as if they
inhabited different and
distant countries. The soldier or robber castes
of Kallas and Maravas,
differ as much from the higher castes in their
features as the
Pareiyas, and in habit of mind still more. Nevertheless,
they claim to be considered
as pure Tamilians. The caste title of the
Maravas, * Deva,' is the
same as that of the old kings of the Pandya
and Chola dynasties. Chieftains
of their race still possess the principalities
of Shevagunga and KamnS,d,
which are called 'the two
Maravas;' and the latter,
the prince of Ramnad, has claimed from
an ancient period to be
considered as Setupati, or hereditary guardian
of Eama's bridge. The other
tribe, the Kallas, have a king of their
own, the Tondaman P^ja,
or Raja of Puducottah ; they claim a
relationship to the
ancient kings of the Chola country ; and they are
regarded by the Tamilian
VeMlas, or cultivators, as next in rank to
themselves. It is possible—though
not, I think, probable—that these
castes settled in the Tamil
country subsequently to the settlement of
the mass of the
population ; but it does not follow that they belonged
to a non-Dravidian race
; for the course which I have supposed the
Kallas and Maravas to have
followed, is precisely that which was
followed on the decline
of ^ihe power of the Pandyas, by various Telugu
and Canarese castes that are unquestionably
Dravidians.
654 APPENDIX.
(5.) The essential unity
of all the Dravidian dialects argues the
unity of the race, inclusive
of the lower castes. The mixed origin of
the Hindtis of the Gaura
provinces may be conjectured, not only from
historical notices, but
from an examination of the component elements
of the northern vernaculars.
In those vernaculars we can trace the
existence of two lingual
currents, the Aryan and the non-Aryan, the
one running counter to
the other; but in no dialect of the Dravidian
languages are such traces
discoverable of any extraneous idiom which
appears to have differed
in character from that of the mass of the language.
All the grammatical
forms of primary importance in all the
Dravidian dialects cohere
together and form one harmonious system.
If the Pareiyas and the
other servile castes were supposed to be a
different race from the
Dravidians, and- the only surviving descendants
of the true aborigines,
it would be necessary to regard the isolated
mountain tribes, the Tudas,
Gonds, &c,, as remnants of the same
aboriginal race ; and if
this theory were correct, the languages of those
long isolated tribes should
be found to differ essentially from Telugu
and the Tamil. On the contrary,
no essential difference in gramma-"
tical structure, or in
the more important names of things, has been
discovered in them ; but
the Gond and Ku, Tuda and Kota dialects,
belong demonstrably to
the same family as the more cultivated Dravidian
tongues. It is also worthy
of notice that though the Pareiyas and the
other servile classes
in the plains live in hamlets by themselves, removed
to a considerable
distance from the villages in which their highcaste
masters reside, there is
no trace amongst them of any difference
in idiom, of peculiar
words, or of peculiar forms of speech. The only
difference apparent, consists
in their mispronunciation of Sanskrit
derivatives, arising from
their general want of education ; and in many
instances, even this difference
is not found to exist.
On the whole, therefore,
the supposition that the lower castes in
the Dravidian provinces
belong to a different race from the higher,
appears to me to be untenable.
It seems safer to hold, that all the
indigenous tribes who were
found by the Aryans in Southern India,
belonged substantially
to one and the same race. It is probable enough
that the Dravidians
were broken up into tribes before the Aryan immigration,
and that the distinctions,
not only of richer and poorer, but
also of master and slave,
had already come into existence amongst
them. Those distinctions
may have formed the foundation of the caste
system, which their Brahmanical
civilisers built up, and which was
moulded by degrees into
an exact counterpart of the caste system of
Northern India.
