"The linguistic term ` Dravidian
' was a contribution of Robert Caldwell to modern Indian
linguistics. He used the term with reference to the four
principal languages of South India, Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and
Malayalam, which "justly claim to be considered as springing
from a common origin, and as forming a distinct family of
tongues "... although non Brahmins from the two main Dravidian
language groups - Tamil and Telegu - joined the non-Brahmin
movement the use of Dravidianism as a political weapon was
mostly confined to the Tamil non-Brahmins..."
"The linguistic term ` Dravidian ' was a
contribution of Robert Caldwell to modern Indian linguistics. He
used the term with reference to the four principal languages of
South India, Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam, which "justly
claim to be considered as springing from a common origin, and as
forming a distinct family of tongues ".(1)
He derived the word Dravidian from the Sanskrit,
Dravida. However, Caldwell was not the first to apply the term
to a group of allied languages. He himself pointed out that a
Sanskrit scholar of the 8th century A.D., Kumarila, had used the
term Andhradravidabhasa to denote the languages of the Telegu
and Tamil countries.(2)
In later times in Sanskrit literature the term
Dravida was used in a broader sense to denote the entire land
south of the Vindhyas and its inhabitants. (3)
An attempt is made in the following pages to
trace how the term Dravidian gained currency in politics in the
period under survey.
The main thesis established by
Caldwell was that the Dravidian languages were “independent of
Sanskrit ". (4) In his lengthy introduction he attempted to
outline the pre-Aryan civilization of the "primitive Dravidians
", and also used the word " Brahmans " as synonymous with "
Aryans ". (5) Scholars like P. Sundaram Pillai and J. M.
Nallaswami Pillai, basing their opinions partly on the views of
Robert Caldwell and G. U. Pope and partly on the Tamil classics
brought to light then, described Tamil culture as independent of
Aryan influence. On the other hand Brahmin scholars and
historians contended that South India was a more marshy jungle
and the reclamation was started by the Aryans who migrated into
South India during the period of the Sutras (750-350 B.C.). (6)
Northern sources refer to Dravidian languages as the Paiiaci
(prakrit), the language of demons.(7)
But non-Brahmin scholars began to argue the
other way. For example S. Somasundara Bharati (1879-1959), a
non-Brahmin Tamil scholar who later became Professor of Tamil
(1933-38) at the Annamalai University, held that the Tamils were
the original inhabitants of South India and that they possessed
a rich civilization before the coming of the Aryans. He wrote:
" The first Aryan stranger, who swam south
across the trackless jungles, was dazzled with the splendour
of the Royal Pandyan courts, and he was not too proud to
seek shelter in the hospitable Tamil land that smiled to a
sunny clime ".(8)
M. Srinivasa Aiyangar commented in his Tamil
Studies, thus:
" Within the last fifteen years a new school
of Tamil scholars has coma into being, consisting mainly of
admirers and castemen of the late lamented professor and
antiquary, Mr. Sundaram Pillai of Trivandrum. Their object
has been to disown and to disprove any trace of indebtedness
to the Aryans, to exalt the civilization of the ancient
Tamils, to distort in the name of historic research current:
traditions and literature, and to pooh-pooh the views of
former scholars, which support Brahmanization of the Tamil
race ". (9)
The educated non-Brahmins by the beginning of
the 20th century began to question the inferior position
assigned to the Dravidian civilization in history. Most of the
non-Brahmin leaders in Madras city as well as in the districts
hailed from the landowning and merchant castes and they began to
aspire to political power and official influence commensurate
with their wealth and status in society). The Brahmins hold a
pre eminent position in education especially the University,
and, as a consequence, in the higher and clerical grades of
government employment. The Brahmins consistently held the
dominant position in government service ever since the
establishment of the British rule in the Carnatic. In 1855, for
example, the Brahmins held 237 of the 305 posts in the upper
levels of the district administration of the Madras
Presidency.10 The following table illustrates the relative
increases in the percentage of appointments held by Brahmins
between 1896 and 1912. (11)
|
Distribution of Selected
Government Posts in 1912 |
| |
No |
Per cent of
total Male
population |
Per cent of
appointments held |
| |
|
|
in 1896 |
in 1912 |
| Deputy Collectors |
|
|
|
|
| Brahmins |
77 |
3.2 |
53 |
55 |
| Non-Brahmin Hindus |
30 |
85.6 |
25 |
21.5 |
| Muhammadans |
15 |
6.6 |
6.5 |
10.5 |
| Indian Christians |
7 |
2.7 |
4 |
5 |
| Europeans and Eurasians |
11 |
0.1 |
11.5 |
8 |
| Sub Judges |
|
|
|
|
| Brahmins |
15 |
same |
71.4 |
83.3 |
| Non-Brahmin Hindus |
3 |
as above |
21.4 |
16.7 |
| Muhammadans |
nil |
|
nil |
nil |
| Indian Christians |
nil |
|
nil |
nil |
| Europeans and Eurasians |
nil |
|
7.2 |
nil |
| District Munsifs |
|
|
|
|
| Brahmins |
93 |
|
66.4 |
72.6 |
| Non-Brahmin Hindus |
25 |
|
21.2 |
19.5 |
| Muhammadans |
2 |
|
0.9 |
1.6 |
| Indian Christians |
5 |
|
11.5 |
3.9 |
| Europeans and Eurasians |
3 |
|
nil |
2.4 |
| |
|
|
|
|
The above table reveals two facts. Firstly, the
position of the non-Brahmin Hindus in government service bore
little relation to their numerical strength. Secondly, the
non-Brahmin Hindus had lost ground over the years 1896-1912,
while the Brahmins had considerably improved their position. The
frustration and bitterness that this discrimination caused was
considerable and it increased when the rate of literacy
increased among the non-Brahmins.
The position of
the Tamil Brahmins in government service was mainly due to their
high rate of literacy in general as well as in English. Literacy
in English was the key to enter government service. The
following two tables show the relative position in literacy
among selected Tamil castes during 1901-1921. (12)
|
Male Literacy of Selected Tamil
Castes, 1901-1921 (in per cents) |
| |
1901 |
1911 |
1921 |
| Brahmin |
73.6 |
71.9 |
71.5 |
| Chetti |
32.0 |
39.1 |
39.5 |
| Nadar |
15.4 |
18.1 |
20.0 |
| Vellala |
6.9 |
24.6 |
24.2 |
| Agamudaiyan |
14.9 |
20.8 |
20.8 |
| Kallan |
10.9 |
15.7 |
16.3 |
| Maravan |
10.6 |
13.8 |
13.7 |
| Vaniyan |
14.8 |
31.7 |
29.8 |
|
Male Literacy in English of
Selected Tamil Castes, 1901-1921 (in per cents) |
| |
1901 |
1911 |
1921 |
| Brahmin |
17.88 |
22.27 |
28.21 |
| Chetti |
.15 |
.98 |
2.34 |
| Nadar |
.05 |
.30 |
.75 |
| Vellala |
.19 |
2.12 |
2.37 |
| Agamudaiyan |
.15 |
.33 |
.72 |
| Kallan |
.13 |
.27 |
.38 |
| Maravan |
.04 |
.l3 |
.23 |
| Vaniyan |
.04 |
1.12 |
1.12 |
The apparent decline in the literacy rate of the
Tamil Brahmins between 1901 and 1921 was due to the fact that "a
number of persons of other less educated castes may, for various
reasons, have returned themselves as Brahmans; and hence the
number of Brahmans has been unduly swollen and the number of
illiterates has increased out of all proportion to the literates
"(13)
The slight decline in the literacy rate
among Velalas between 1911 and 1921 was also attributed to the
same fact that a number of persons of other less educated castes
may have returned themselves as Vellalas.
In the
matter of English literacy the Tamil Brahmins led all the other
castes. But there was a gradual rise in general literacy as well
as in English literacy among the different non-Brahmin castes
during the first two decades of the 20th century. Educated non
Brahmins soon realised that education was mainly responsible for
the ascendancy of Brahmins in all walks of life, more especially
in government service. They became conscious of their
disadvantageous position in society arising out of their
backwardness in education.
As early as 1909 an
attempt was made in Madras City by two lawyers - P. Subramanyam
and M. Purushotham Naidu - to form an organisation under the
title 'The Madras Non-Brahmin Association '.(14)These two
provisional secretaries, in a statement to the press, explained
that the Association had been started " for the purpose of
ameliorating the condition of the Non-Brahmin classes, and
lifting them up, as much as possible, to a higher social level,
by affording pecuniary help to the poor and intelligent boys of
the non-Brahmin communities and helping them to prosecute their
studies, and by giving scholarships to deserving young men to
learn the various industries in foreign countries and by
adopting such other methods as are calculated to improve the
social status of the various backward non-Brahmin communities in
the Madras Presidency ".(15) It was also stated that the
Association was distinctly non-political and non-aggressive.
Thus an association was conceived purely for social progress.
A few days after the above announcement a letter
to the editor of the Madras Mail (6 May 1909) was written by a
certain V. Vannamuthu, in which he argued that the non-Brahmins
of Southern India were all of Dravidian origin ; therefore, he
suggested the adoption of, the name ` The Madras Dravidian
Association'.
Another letter from ` M.P.N.' said: " The
non-Brahmins form the bulk of the population, and almost all the
Zamindars, and rich landed proprietors, and the bulk of the
thriving merchants and dubashas belong to this community: But
yet ... the community as a whole has not sufficiently realised
the importance of the benefits of Western education, and ... it
has, as a result of this apathy, been left behind in the race by
other and more pushful communities. The non-Brahmin is certainly
not wanting in intelligence, if only he tries to develop it ".
(16)
The reader even suggested that a few Europeans
should be invited to participate in the deliberations of the
Association and offer advice. The reader also wanted that the
non-Brahmins should avoid discussion of the terms ` non-Brahmin'
and ` Dravidian ' and begin work in earnest. (17)
The initiative taken by two Vakils in starting this association
was criticised by a reader who called himself ` Alpha '.(18) The
reader felt that the Vakils who book the initiative would be
able to attract only members of the same profession and so
suggested that "public men like Dr. Nair, Messrs. Theagaroya
Chatty and Venkatasamy Naidu ought to be at the helm to steer
the ship clear of all petty mindedness and narrow spirit ". (19)
It was a remarkable suggestion because it was Dr. Nair and
Theagaroya Chatty who later successfully founded the Non-Brahmin
Movement in 1916.
Even before the formal
inauguration of the proposed Non Brahmin Association, objections
were raised to a communal organisation. E. Ekambara Iyer, a
Brahmin correspondent from Nandyal, wrote in the Madras Mail (2
June 1909), criticising the designation of the Association for
in its scope it included " the improvement of the whole human
race in India, except the poor Brahmin ".
He wanted the educated non-Brahmins to think
twice before supporting this Association, and to " try their
best to sink (not to accentuate) any or all difference based
upon class and class or caste and creed ". Similar feelings were
expressed by C. V. Reddy, a non-Brahmin reader from Guntur, in
another letter to the editor .(20)
He considered
that the very name of the Association implied hostility to the
Brahmins which was neither necessary nor desirable. Further C.
V. Reddi pointed out the " too wide and clumsy " nature of the
term 'non-Brahmin' which meant to include "every caste and race
in the Presidency, except Brahmins", and said :
" The Kshatriyas and the Vaisyas, though
they would fain supplant the Brahmins, yet would think it
infra dig to mix with the fourth class ".(21)
He even feared that there might not be enough
sympathy and co-operation between class and class to ensure
success to this movement and therefore suggested that more
definite and restricted associations such as the Raddi
Association, the Balija Association, and the Vellala Association
were likely to be more useful and practicable .(22) Thus there
were differences of opinion among non-Brahmins themselves over
the naming of the Association and also doubts, over the
co-operation expected from different non-Brahmin castes.
After so much discussion and criticism of the proposed
Non-Brahmin Association during May-June 1909, no efforts were
reported in the following months regarding the actual formation
of the Association. Towards the middle of September, the two
provisional honorary secretaries reported that the holding of
the first public meeting had bean postponed as it was considered
expedient to hold it after the Association had enrolled one
thousand members, and that they hoped to achieve the target by
October 1909.(23)
After this announcement nothing
was heard of the proposed inauguration of the Madras Non-Brahmin
Association. It was likely that a sufficient number of
non-Brahmins failed to come forward to extend support for the
Association. This may be due to the lack of leadership from
influential non-Brahmins like Dr. Nair and P. Theagaroya Chatty
who later came forward in 1916 to start a movement with the same
objectives of the above Association.
It was also
likely that the circumstances were not ripe enough to bring out
the discontents among non-Brahmins into the open. Though this
isolated attempt in 1909 to organise an association for the
welfare and progress of the non-Brahmins did not succeed, it
revealed the beginnings of such thinking in that direction.
The few non-Brahmins who were already in government service had
their own grievances. They alleged that they had no fair deal in
their prospects on account of partiality and nepotism by Brahmin
superiors, and they feared for a long time even to go forward
and represent their grievances publicly. For the purpose of
voicing their grievances collectively a group of non-Brahmins
started an association called 'The Madras United League' in
Madras city in 1912.24 The League was primarily meant for the
government employees and the members were mostly from the
Revenue Board Office and the Public Works Department. However
other interested non-Brahmins were also allowed to join the
League and the Secretary, C. Natesa Mudaliar, himself was a
private doctor. Within a year the membership of the League rose
to three hundred. (25)
One of the useful services
rendered by the Madras United League started in 1912 was the
running of an adult education class in the evenings in which the
members themselves played the role of teachers. At the first
anniversary of the Madras United League, a resolution was
introduced to change the name of the League on the ground that
it was not indicative of the constituents of the organization or
its objectives.
A few suggested that the League might be called
the Non-Brahmin Association. There was much opposition to a
negative name and it was suggested that the League might be
called the Dravidian Association. This was accepted and the name
of the Madras United League was changed into the Madras
Dravidian Association. (26) However this was not the first time
that the word ` Dravidian ' was used to denote castes other than
Brahmins. As early as September 1892 an association called the
Adi Dravida Jana Sabha was founded in Madras by Panchamas
who claimed themselves as ` Adi' or ancient Dravidians. (27)
Similarly a member of the Pariah Mahajana Sabha (founded in
October 1894 in Madras city), "resented the names 'Pariah' and `
Panchama ' and claimed to be called by their racial name the
Dravidians ".(28)
The Madras Dravidian
Association held regular meetings which provided an opportunity
for many non-Brahmins to meet and discuss their problems. (29)
Literary meetings were also arranged under its auspices. (30)
However the popular annual function was the reception accorded
to the non-Brahmin graduates of the year. It brought the young
graduates of the community in one platform and introduced them
to the elite of the non-Brahmins, and such occasions were said
to have " infused the spirit of healthy revolt against the
Brahmins and the spirit of self-respect in themselves ". (31)
Almost all the leading non-Brahmin citizens of Madras city
attended this annual gathering. (32)
An important
achievement of the Madras Dravidian Association was the
establishment of a hostel in Madras city for non-Brahmin
students in July 1916. Non-Brahmin students who came for
collegiate education from districts had difficulty in getting
hostel accommodation in Madras city because of caste barriers.
(33) The hostel was called ` Dravidian Home' and it was run
under the care of C. Natesa Mudaliar. (34) The Dravidian Home
had a literary Society for the benefit of its inmates. The
establishment of the Dravidian Home was the first practical step
of a small but influential group of non-Brahmins in Madras city
to organize themselves.
The Madras Dravidian
Association became a popular organisation among the non-Brahmins
and it attracted the attention of non-Brahmin politicians like
P. Theagaroya Chetti (1852-1925) and Dr. T. M. Nair (1868-1919).
They saw the possibilities of building on the basis of the
Dravidian Association a more powerful political movement to
voice the grievances of the non-Brahmins.
The
non-Brahmin consciousness and the current feelings of despair
among the non-Brahmin youth were clearly brought out in
Non-Brahmin Letters, a book published in Madras in 1915.(35) It
contains 21 letters and they are signed by and addressed to
different persons by name. The names include caste suffixes such
as ` Chatti ', ` Raddy ', ` Naidu ', ` Mudaliar ' and ` Row
'(36) The letters in general reflect the growing consciousness
among educated non-Brahmin youth of their lowly position in
society. The letters urge the non-Brahmins to educate themselves
and to organise in order to compete with the Brahmins. It was
suggested in one of the letters that a Dravida Maha Sabha should
be formed in Madras city with branches in each district, taluk,
town and village with the object of uplifting the non-Brahmin
community. (37)
The letters also reveal the lack
of unity and mutual jealousy among the various non-Brahmin
castes. One letter points out how a donor agrees to donate Rs.
5,000 for the non-Brahmin movement if he was made an important
office-bearer . (38) Another expresses suspicion over the
activities of an unnamed person in the non-Brahmin movement.
(39) The prevalence of suspicion and jealousy among the
non-Brahmins explains the reason for the late origin of a united
effort among the non-Brahmins of South India .(40) But by the
middle of the second decade when they realised that their
literacy rate was rising and that they had the necessary
qualifications to compete with the Brahmins they inevitably rose
in protest against the exclusive control of government services
and public life by Brahmins. The Madras Mail (19 July 1916)
rightly observed : " In course of time education has been able
to break down many of the barriers in the way of the non-Brahmin
communities, who were not backward in taking advantages of the
opportunities offered ".
From the beginning of
the second decade of this century there was widespread political
agitation in India for securing Self Government. In view of the
active participation of India in the war effort Britain
indicated that steps would be taken towards responsible
representative self-government after the war. At this juncture
the catalyst which triggered the formation of a non Brahmin
political organisation was the foundation of the Home Rule
Movement by Mrs. Annie Besant. Already the non-Brahmins looked
with suspicion at Congress as a Brahmin controlled organisation.
Their suspicion grew stronger when Mrs. Besant joined the
Congress and began her work for Home Rule. Mrs. Besant had
become President of the Theosophical Society in 1907.
The Theosophical Society was first founded in New York in 1875
to promote the cause of ` Universal Brotherhood' and to
popularise 'Eastern Wisdom' in the West. (41) Subsequently the
Theosophical Society shifted its headquarters to Bombay in 1879
and, ultimately, to Madras city in 1882. The leaders of the
movement, both in their lectures and writing-, extolled the
virtues of ancient Aryan civilization and Sanskrit literature.
In Madras city as well as in the districts Sanskrit schools wore
started, societies for the promotion of Aryan morals
established, and Hindu religious literature disseminated through
catechisms and tracts. Mrs. Besant quickly established herself
as the outstanding revivalist of Smarta Hinduism in South India.
(42) In addition to encouraging scholarly researches in Sanskrit
she was largely instrumental in arousing cultural and religious
nationalism among the Brahmin politicians in Madras city.(43)
Mrs. Besant organised the Madras Hindu Association in January
1904. (44) She justified the fourfold caste system, supporting
her argument from Sanskrit literature.(45)
When Mrs. Besant extended her activities of the
Congress and initiated the Home Rule League in Madras in
September 1916, non-Brahmins felt that the success of the Home
Rule Movement in the event of Reforms would result in the
entrenchment of Brahmins in the administration of the country.
Therefore the non-Brahmin leaders felt that there was greater
need among them to unite and counteract Mrs. Besant's Home Rule
Movement than ever before.
At a meeting held in Madras in November 1916 by
a group of about thirty non-Brahmins, including P. Thaagaroya
Chetti and Dr. T. M. Nair, it was resolved to start a company
for publishing newspapers advocating the cause of the
non-Brahmin community. The idea to bring out daily newspapers
came foremost in the minds of the non-Brahmin leaders because of
the Brahmin control of the two of the three leading dailies in
Madras city. The English daily Hindu (started in 1878 as a
weekly and was turned into a tri-weekly in 1883, and into a
daily in 1889) was published by S. Kasturiranga Iyengar, while
the only Tamil daily Swadesamitran (started in 1882 as a weekly
and became a daily in 1889) was published by A. Rangaswami
Iyangar. (46)
Both were highly nationalistic in spirit and
both vigorously advocated Home Rule. The Brahmin hegemony over
journalism stemmed from two factors : first, as pointed out
earlier, the Brahmins constituted an elite group in society, and
secondly, their recognised position of leadership in society
enabled them to assert themselves as protagonists of the
nationalist movement. Therefore the non-Brahmin leaders founded
the South Indian People's Association primarily for conducting
daily newspapers to guide, define and publicise the views of the
non-Brahmins on public questions) The first issue of the
Association's English daily Justice appeared on 26 February
1917. The Tamil daily Tiravitan was started in June 1917. For
the Telugu readers the well established Telugu weekly
Andhraprakasika (founded in 1885) was acquired and was changed
into a daily. On the occasion of the first anniversary of the
Justice, the Madras Mail (26 Feb. 1918) wrote : " Two or three
years ago no one would have been bold enough to predict success
for an Indian paper in Madras hostile to Home Rule ".
The
South Indian People's Association issued the Non-Brahmin
Manifesto in December 1916, to define the attitude of the non
Brahmin communities in the Madras Presidency towards the Home
Rule Movement. (47) The Manifesto surveyed the condition of the
non-Brahmins, referred to the pre-eminent position of the
Brahmins in various fields and pointed out the directions for
progress of the non-Brahmins in future. It declared that the
Indian Constitution should be revised after war and there should
be progressive political development towards self-government and
in the meanwhile the British authority which alone could hold
the scales even between various castes and creeds should
continua. The demand for Home Rule was regarded as an extremist
claim, unsuitable for the then existing conditions and a demand
which the non-Brahmins could not support. The Manifesto stated
that the post-war scheme of Reforms should be such as to enable
every class and caste to get representation according to its
number and acknowledged position in the country and exhorted the
non-Brahmins to organise themselves in associations and educate
themselves.
The announcement of Edwin Montagu,
the Secretary of State for India, on 20 August 1917 outlining
the reform measures, was the signal for the starting of intense
political activity among the non-Brahmins. On the same day when
Montagu announced the Reform scheme in London, the non-Brahmins
held the first conference at Coimbatore. (48) Speaking at the
conference Dr. T. M. Nair said that the non-Brahmin sentiment
had been there in the country 'for ages' and that it was openly
expressed then because
" Non-Brahmins were looking to the British
Government for protection, to hold scales evenly and to mete
out Justice, but when they saw a movement progressing whose
object was to undermine British influence and power in this
country, they thought it their duty to rally round the
British Government and to support them ".(49)
The Madras Mail (31 Dec. 1917) also pointed out
that: "The sentiment underlying the movement is the deep-rooted
fear and distrust the non-Brahmin community have of Brahmin
domination .... This underlying sentiment has been in existence
for generations . . .".
The political party
organised by the South Indian People's Association was named the
South Indian Liberal Federation which later came to be popularly
known as the Justice Party after the English daily Justice. The
Federation was organised in October 1917 and its objectives wore
defined as :
"(a) to create and promote the education,
social, economic, political, material and moral progress of
all communities in Southern India other than Brahmins,
(b) to discuss public questions and make a
true and timely representation to Government of the views
and interests of the people of Southern India with the
object of safeguarding and promoting the interests of all
communities other than Brahmins and
(c) to disseminate by public lectures, by
distribution of literature and by other means sound and
liberal views in regard to public opinion ".(50)
The party was open to all persons other than
Brahmins who subscribed to its objects. Branches of the South
Indian Liberal Federation were soon organised in the major towns
of the presidency. Membership was open to all persons of
Southern India, other than Brahmins, and it included leading
representatives of the Indian mercantile community, zamindars
and landholders, pleaders and retired Government officials. (51)
From August 1917 onwards a number of Non Brahmin
Conferences were held in the districts in which local non
Brahmin leaders took an active part in shaping Dravidian
consciousness. All these conferences passed resolutions
demanding that any Reform scheme should secure adequate
representation of non-Brahmins in the legislature and in all
branches of administration. (52)
The formation of
the South Indian People's Association and the South Indian
Liberal Federation and the publication of its three dailies soon
brought to the surface the latent Dravidian consciousness among
the non-Brahmins. The founding of numerous Dravidian
associations in Madras city were an outward expression of this
consciousness.(53) The various Dravidian associations while
leaving the political activities to be channelled by the Justice
Party, confined themselves to educational and social activities
such as the running of fro e night school, reading room, library
and hostel, and offering scholarships to deserving non-Brahmin
students.
The Indian Councils Act of 1909
introduced communal representation in the legislatures. In the
Madras Presidency two seats were provided for the Muslim
community among the nineteen elected members. (54) The granting
of communal representation to Muslims in 1909 served as a
precedent for the non-Brahmins to seek special representation in
the Legislative Council as an underprivileged community. In a
memorandum submitted to the Madras Government, the Justice Party
pointed out that, " Increased power bestowed on the 'people
without communal demarcation will lead to greater concentration
in the hands of a few and to greater disparity between the few
and the many.
This is what happened in a very pronounced
manner in southern India since the Minto Morley reforms and
necessitated the starting of the non-Brahmin Movement ".(55) A
few months earlier Madras Mail (31 Dec.. 1917) in a leader
pointed out that,
"Even under the Minto-Morley scheme of
reforms the non-Brahmins felt that they did not secure
sufficient representation to counterbalance Brahmin
pretensions to power ".
The first victory for the Justice Party and
thereby for Dravidian Nationalism came when the Government of
India Act of 1919 provided for the reservation of seats in
general non-Muhammadan, constituencies to non-Brahmins in Madras
Presidency.(56)
During this period Dravidian
Nationalism also found expression among the members of the
Congress Party in the Madras Presidency. Non-Brahmins who
remained loyal to the Congress began to think in terms of
forming an organization within the Congress to safeguard their
interests in elections under the proposed Worms by seeking
communal representation. This was in a way to counteract the
claims of the Justice Party to be the sole spokesman of
non-Brahmins. This led to the founding of the Madras Presidency
Association in September 1917, with the avowed object of gaining
communal representation .(57)The Justice Party criticised the
formation of the Madras Presidency Association and stated that
"it has been engineered into existence by Brahmin Home Rulers,
in the interests of the united front bogey ".(58)
The membership of the Madras Presidency Association was confined
to representatives of the various communities of the Madras
Presidency other than the Brahmins and Muslims, who did not
agree with , the attitude of the Justice Party towards the
reform proposals. (59) But Brahmins and Muslims were admitted
into meetings and conferences of the Association as `
observers'. (60) Branches of the Association were established
all over the Presidency and regular conferences ware held in the
districts."
By December 1917 it was reported that the M.P.A.
had 15 branches with over 800 members .12 The Association
brought out two daily news papers, one in English and one in
Tamil. C. Karunakara-Menon, editor and publisher of the English
daily the Indian Patriot devoted ' his paper to the interests of
the Association. The Tamil daily was a now newspaper called
Tecapaktan ('The Patriot') and was edited by Thiru. Vi. Ka.
Although both the Justice Party and the Madras Presidency
Association agreed on the need for communal representation they
differed over the means of securing it. The Justice Party wanted
separate non-Brahmin electorates, 63 but the M.P.A. opposed
communal electorates and wanted the reservation of a certain
number of seats for non-Brahmins in general electorates.s4 In
other words the M.P.A. pleaded for the creation of plural
constituencies with a general electoral roll. In fact finally
when the communal representation was decided by Lord Meston the
alternative suggested by the M.P.A. was adopted and 28 seats in
plural member constituencies were reserved for non-Brahmins out
of 63 seats available in non-Muhammadan constituencies .(65)
The M.P.A., though it ceased to function after the introduction
of the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms, doubled, the impact of the
Justice Party on Tamil politics for it revealed that
nationalists could also be regionalists and that Congress could
not look askance at regional issues. The M.P.A. was important,
too, in drawing apart from the Brahmin congressmen a number of
able non-Brahmin agitators and scholars like V. O. Chidambaram
Pillai and Tiru. Vi. Ka., and in providing a training ground for
new leaders like E. V. Ramaswami Naicker.(66)
At
the same time when Dravidian consciousness was taking shape not
only the question who were Dravidians but also the question who
were non-Brahmins came to be widely asked. The leaders of the
Justice Party claimed that the term ` non-Brahmins' denoted all
other than ` Brahmins'. But the leadership of the party came
mostly from the ` advanced ' or ` forward ' non-Brahmin Hindu
castes which according to one estimate formed about 19 per cent
of the population. But they always claimed to include in the
movement the 'backward' non-Brahmins (49 per cent), .depressed
classes (Panchamas-17 per (Muslims and Christians).(67)
The leaders of the Justice Party from the beginning were quite
aware of " the big question of lifting up the artisan and
depressed classes ".(68) Dr. T. M. Nair expressed sympathy for
the Panchamas and he stated that the Justice Party would have to
organise and win the support of the Panchamas to justify the
Party's claim to be the sole representative of South Indian
non-Brahmins .(69) But there were doubts about the genuineness
of the higher caste-non Brahmins' sympathy towards the
Panchamas. Leaders of the Panchama organisations were reluctant
to support the Justice Party. (70) The two leading Panchama
organisations in Madras city were the Adi Dravida Jana Sabha and
the Pariah Mahajana Sabha. These two associations held
periodical meetings independently and protested against the
granting of immediate Home Rule.(71) They were mostly keen on
social reform rather than constitutional advancement.
Although the Panchamas wished to keep aloof from the Justice
Party the Muslims and the Indian Christians extended their
support and freely participated in the meetings and conferences
of the justice Party. Mohamed Usman, the Secretary of the Madras
Muslim League and A. K. G. Ahmad Thambi Maricar, the Muslim
member of the Madras Legislative Council, presided over and
addressed some of the non-Brahmin conferences. (72) During the
Khilafat agitation the Justice Party passed a resolution to the
effect 'that non-Brahmins of Madras were emphatically of opinion
that the integrity of the Caliphate should be preserved '.(73)
Rev. Fr. Ambrose, a Christian, moved a resolution in the
Coimbatore Non-Brahmin Conference, explaining the objects of a
Central District Association in Coimbatore. (74) Therefore it
may be concluded that from the point of view of most of the
non-Brahmin leaders with the exception of leaders like Dr. Nair,
the term 'non Brahmins' included in its compass non-Brahmin
Hindus excluding the Panchamas, but including the Muslims and
the Indian Christians.
During the second decade
of the 20th century the term Dravidian gained a racial as well
as a linguistic meaning. From the time of the formation of the
Justice Party the term Dravidian applied to non-Brahmin castes
in South India, and Dravidian Nationalism emerged as a defence
of these castes against Brahmin dominance and a reassertion of
cultural identity.
The leaders of the Justice Party appealed to
Dravidians-that is, not simply to those who spoke one of the
Dravidian languages but to those who claimed to inherit a common
racial heritage to unite them against the so-called Aryan
invaders from the North-the South Indian Brahmins. Therefore the
term Dravidian may be said to have been brought into politics as
a rallying point for South Indian non-Brahmins. With the
exception of a few leaders, the Telegu non-Brahmins in the
Justice Party hardly identified themselves as Dravidians. Those
few Telugu leaders were bilingual : their mother tongue was
Telugu although they lived in Madras city or in the Tamil
districts. (75)
The Telugu Congress leader Konda Venkatappayya,
speaking at the Fifth Andhra Conference at Nellore, said :
" The Provinces of India as they now stand
were not originally formed on a language basis. As Andhras,
Dravidians, Canarese and Malayalees have ,been irregularly
grouped in the one Presidency of Madras, so different races
speaking different languages are likewise indiscriminately
clubbed together in other provinces ".(76)
By the term `Dravidians' he meant `Tamils'. From
the time when Caldwell published his work, Dravidianism was
upheld by Tamil-speakers, because Tamil was considered to be the
most ancient of the Dravidian languages. (77)
Further, Telugu hardly expressed any desire to
claim Dravidian status, because Telugu, unlike Tamil, contained
a great number of Sanskrit words, which tended to weaken the
claim that Telugu was a culture independent of the so-called
Aryan influence. (78). P.Chenchiah, a member of the M.P.A., who
represented the twelve Telugu districts and gave evidence before
the Joint Select Committee on the Government of India Bill,
1919, observed :
" The relation between Brahmins and
non-Brahmins in the Telugu area is more cordial and
harmonious than it is in the South . . . . The real living
issue in that area is not the communal representation
question, but the question of a separate Province for the
language area ". (79)
From this it was clear that the communal
antagonism between Brahmins and non-Brahmin in Andhra country
was not so bitter as it was in Tamilnad. (80) Hence
although non Brahmins from the two main Dravidian language
groups - Tamil and Telegu - joined the non-Brahmin movement the
use of Dravidianism as a political weapon was mostly confined to
the Tamil non-Brahmins."
Notes
1.
Robert Caldwell, op. cit., p. 4.
2 Ibid., p. 5.
3. For example the term Pancadravidas
meant the Brahmins of five groups which included Kannada,
Telugu, Maharashtra, Karnata (Tamil), and Gurjara. K. A.
Nilakanta Sastri, Cultural contacts between Aryans and
Dravidians (Bombay, 1967), p. 10.
4. Robert Caldwell, op.
cit., pp. 46-48.
5 Ibid., pp. 117-119.
6 S. Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Ancient
India (London, 1911), p. 5. The author pointed out that, " The
history of peninsular India begins ... somewhat later than that
of Hindustan ; for the Dravidian civilization of the south,
though much more ancient than its history, owes its history to
Aryan immigration, as much as does north India ".
Ibid., pp.
29-30.
7.Robert Caldwell, op, cit., p. 6.
8. S.
Somasundara Bharati, Tamil Classics and Tamilakam (Tuticorin,
1912), p. 6.
9. M. Srinivasa Aiyangar, Tamil Studies (Madras,
1914), p. 46.
10 R. E. Frykenburg, "Elite formation in
Nineteenth Century South India An interpretative analysis ",
Proceedings of the First International Conference Seminar of
Tamil Studies, I, (Kuala Lumpur, 1966), p. 573.
11 Great
Britain, Parliamentary Papers, vol. XXI (Reports from
Commissioners, etc., vol. XI), " Royal Commission on the Public
Services ", Appendix, Vol. II, " Minutes of Evidence relating to
the Indian and Provincial Services taken in Madras from the 8th
to the 17th of January 1913 ", cd. 7293, 1914, pp. 103-104.12
Census of India : Madras, 1921, XIII, Part I, pp. 128-129.
13
Ibid., pp. 119,128-129.
14 Madras Mail, 1 May 1909. The
membership fee was fixed at Re. ] p.a.
15. Ibid.
16.
Ibid., 8 May 1908.
17 Ibid.
18 Ibid., 22 May 1909.
19.
Ibid. A 'Graduate' proposed the name of P. Kesava Pillay of
Gouty among other leaders who should be approached to take the
lead in forming the Non-Brahmin Association. Ibid., 2 June 1909.
In fact later Kesava Pillai became one of the founders of the
Madras Presidency Association. E. F. Irschick, op. cit., pp.
60-61.
20. Ibid., 3 June 1909.
21. Ibid.
22. Ibid.
23 Ibid., 10 Sep. 1909.
24. P. Rangaswami Naidu, " The Origin
of Justice Party ", Justice Party Golden Jubilee Souvenir
(Madras, 1968), p. 257.
25. Ibid., p. 258. ac Ibid., p. 257.
27. B. B. Majumdar, Indian Political Associations and Reform of
Legislature (1818-1917), (Calcutta, 1965), p. 259.
28 Madras
Mail, 9 May 1916.
29 During 1914, the following
meetings held under the auspices of the Madras Dravidian
Association were reported :
`Our present social needs'-M.
Singaravelu Chettiar (15 May).
'The historical bearing of the
Indian Epics'-G. Ranganatha Mudaliar (25 July).
` Paropakaram
'-Srimat Pamban Kumara Guru Dasa Swamigal
(22 Aug.).
`The
present condition of the Dravidians'-Mrs. Alamelmangammal (5
Sep.).
'The Thirumurais of St. Appar'-E. N. Thanikachella
Mudaliar(3 Oct.).
' The conditions of progress'-Mrs. Besant
(30 Oct.). The dates refer to Madras Mail.
30 'The Antiquity
of Tamil' was the topic in one such meeting. Madras Mail, 5 Feb.
1916.
31 K. M. Balasubramaniam, South Indian Celebrities
(Madras, 1934), I, p. 49.
32 Madras Mail, 26 Nov. 1915, 27
Nov. 1916, 26 Nov. 1917. Besides the general reception to all
non-Brahmin graduates by the Madras Dravidian Association,
certain castes claiming Vaisya status (Komati, Chetti) arranged
separate reception to their graduates. Madras Mail, 24 Nov.
1916, 25 Dec. 1918.
33 The Madras Mail (16 Oct. 1915) in a
leader entitled 'Hostels in Madras' discussed the problem of
finding proper accommodation for students from the mofussil. It
referred to the Senate Committee Report of the Madras
University, according to which over one thousand students in
Madras City were forced to find accommodation for themselves.
34 Madras Mail, 30 June 1916.
35 The author is one S.K.N.,
and the book is dedicated to' The Non-Brahmin Community'.
According to E. F. Irschick it was published by C. Karunakara
Menon. E. F. Irschick, op. cit., p. 46.
36 The last named
caste suffix 'Row', more correctly ` Rao ', denotes a Telugu or
Maratha Brahmin. But a study of the contents of the letter
signed by ` S. N. Row' shows that the writer is a non-Brahmin.
For example he says: ` I have Brahmin friends who are more
enthusiastic for our cause than many of our leaders, as we call
them'.
Non-Brahmin Letters, p. 28.
37 Ibid., p. 59.
38
Ibid., pp. 65-66.
39 Ibid., p. 80.
40 The Non-Brahmin
Movement in Maharashtra was started in the last quarter of the
19th century by Jotirao Phule (1827-1890) of Poona. Phule
attempted to break the monopoly of Brahmins over religious and
intellectual life in Maharashtra by organising non-Brahmin
religious ceremonies and educating lower-castes. For this
purpose he founded the Satya Shodak Samaj in 1873. After Phule's
death the Non-Brahmin Movement was revived in 1900 by the
Maharaja of Kolhapur State, His Highness Shri Shahu Chhatrapati
(1874 1922). Sir P. Theagaroya Chetti, one of the
founder-leaders of the Non¬Brahmin Movement in Madras, attended
the Non-Brahmin Social Conference at Hubli on 27 July 1920,
which was presided over by the Maharaja. A. B. Latthe, Memoirs
of His Highness Shri Shahu Chhatrapati (Bombay, 1924), pp.
322-325, 577-580.
Ian Copland, " The Maharaja of Kolhapur and
the Non-Brahmin Movement, 1902-10 ", Modern Asian Studies, VII,
2, Apr. 1973, pp. 209-225.
41 J. N. Farquhar, Modern
Religious Movements in India (Delhi, 1967), pp. 218-223.
42
There are two principal divisions among the Brahmins. The larger
section Smarta Brahmins worship Siva, while the smaller section
Sri Vaishnava Brahmins worship Vishnu. The Smartas were often
known by their caste title Aiyar but some bore the title Sastri
; the Sri Vaishnavas were known as lyengars but some had names
ending in -achari or -acharya.
43 C. H. Heimsath, Indian
Nationalism and Hindu Social Reform (Princeton, 1964), pp.
255-257.
44 For the aims and objects of the Association see
N. Subbarau Pantulu Garu (ed.), Hindu Social Progress (Madras,
1904).
The Varnasrama Dharma Samraksana Sabha was founded in
Madras city in 1915 and soon branches came up in districts. At
the first annual conference of the Sabha at Conjeevaram the
following resolution was passed : " Varnasshrama Dharma of the
Hindus must be preserved in all its purity and perfection and
that it is consistent with order and progress in our motherland
". Madras Mail, 3 May 1916.
A Students Hindu Association was
founded in Madras in 1915, and at the first anniversay meeting
Mrs. Besant spoke on' Students and politics'. Madras Mail, 18
Feb. 1916.
45 Annie Besant, Wake up, India (Madras, 1913),
pp. 262-294.
46 The third leading daily (English) Madras Mail
was owned by Europeans.
47 Hindu (W), 22 Dec. 1916.
The
full text of the Non-Brahmin Manifesto Golden Jubilee Souvenir
(Madras, 1968), pp. 1-7. Also in E. F. Irschick, op. cit.,
Appendix 1.
48 Madras Mail, 20 Aug. 1917. The Congress Party
was also holding its District Conference at the same place and
time.
is given in the Justice Party
49 Ibid., 22 Aug.
1917.
50 Ibid., 18 Oct. 1917.
51 Note on S.I.L.F. appended
to the address presented by the S.I.L.F. to Chelmsford and
Montagu on their visit to Madras on 19 Dec. 1917. IOL. MSS. r.
D. 523/26, Montagu Collection, Addresses presented at Madras.
52 Of all the conferences the annual South Indian Non-Brahmin
Confederation held in Madras city symbolised the growing
political awareness among the non-Brahmins. Madras Mail, 3 Dec.
1917,13 Jan. 1919, 30 Dec. 1919.
53 The Royapuram Dravidian
Association (10 Sep. 1917), The Dravidian Reading Room and
Library at Egmore (26 Sep. 1917), The Royapettah Dravidian
Association (26 Oct. 1917), The Georgetown Dravidian Association
(4 Dec. 1917), The Alandur Dravidian Association (3 Dec. 1917),
The Purasawalkam Dravidian Association (16 Aug. 1918).
The
dates refer to Madras Mail.
54 Notes on the Administration of
Sir Arthur Lawley, Governor of Madras, 1906-1911 (Madras, 1912),
p. 158.
55 Madras Mail, 17 Sep. 1918.
56 E. F. Irschick,
op. cit., pp. 91-159.
57 Madras Mail, 21 Sep. 1917.
58 Ibid., 26 Sep. 1917.
59 The Justice Party rejected the
Congress-League scheme of reforms, whereas M.P.A. accepted it
subject to communal representation. Hindu (W), 14 .1917.
60
Madras Mail, 20 Dec. 1917. To the Tanjore conference held in
April 8, thirty Muslims came from Nagore and Negapatam and
extended their ort. Ibid., 22 Apr. 1918. Some of the conferences
were held in the same place either simultaneously immediately
after the Justice Party Conference.
61 Ibid., 14 Nov. 1917.
62 OL. MSS. Eur. D. 523/36, Montagu Collection. Address
presented by the A. to Montagu and Chelmsford on their visit to
Madras on 17 Dec. 1917.
63 Great Britain, Parliamentary
Papers, vol. IV, House of Commons Paper no. 203, 1919. Report
from the Joint Select Committee on the Govt. of India Bill.
Appendix H, Memorandum of the S.LL.F.
64 Ibid., vol. II,
Minutes of Evidence, Representatives of the M.P.A.
65 IOL.
MSS. Eur. F. 136/33, Meston Collection. Letter from Lord Meston
to Lord Willingdon, Governor of Madras, 8 Mar. 1920, Madras.
66 David Arnold, Nationalism and Regional Politics: Tamilad,
India, 1920¬1937, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation (University of
Sussex, 1973), p. 53. E. V. Ramaswami Naicker was the chairman
of the Reception Committee when the second annual conference was
held at Erode. Madras Mail, 11 Oct. 1919.
67 S. Saraswathi,
Minorities in Madras State, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation
(University of Madras, 1965), cited in P. Spratt, D.M.K. in
Power ( Bombay, 1970), p. 19.
The Coimbatore Non-Brahmin
Association resolved 'to work for the political, social and
economic advancement of the non-Brahmins-Hindus, Musalmans and
Christians-of the district'. Madras Mail, 7 Sep. 1917.
68
Madras Mail, 10 Aug. 1917.
69 A. A. Nair, " Dr. T. M. Nair ",
in Justice Party Golden Jubilee Souvenir, p. 44.
70 E. F.
Irschick, op. cit., p. 71.
71 One of the speakers at a
meeting of the Pariah Mahajana Sabha said : " that unless and
until caste distinction was crushed and the depressed classes
treated better, India should not dream of either self-government
or Home Rule ". Madras Mail, 24 Jan. 1916. In November 1917, the
Adi Dravida Jana Sabha passed a resolution stating that, the
immediate grant of the Home Rule to India will be injurious to
the masses of India in general and to the Adi Dravidian
Panchamas in particular ". Madras Mail, 5 Nov. 1917.
72
Ibid., 28 Dec. 1917, 20 Apr. 1918, 13 Jan., 21 June, 22 Sep.
1919.
73 Ibid., 22 Sep. 1919.
74 Ibid., 22 Aug.
1917.
75E. F. Irschick, op. cit., pp. 176-178.
76 Madras Mail, 1 June 1917
77 Caldwell was also aware of
this when he wrote : " It thus appears that the word `Dravida',
from which the term `Dravidiari' has been formed, though
sometimes used in a restricted sense, as equivalent to Tamil, is
better fitted, notwithstanding, for use as a generic term, in as
much as it has the advantage of having already been occasionally
used by native philologists in a generic term". Caldwell, op.
cit., p. 7.
78 This was one of the reasons why the purist
movement succeeded in Tamilnad whereas it did not succeed in
other Dravidian-language speaking areas.
79Great Britain,
Parliamentary Papers, Vol. IV, House of Commons paper d. 203,
1919. Report from the Joint Select Committee on the Govt. of
India 11, vol. II, Minutes of Evidence, p. 298.
80 For the
same reason when the Self-Respect Movement was started by V.R.
as a protest against Brahminism, it gained popularity only in
the Tamil tricts and not elsewhere.
Similarly, at a later
date in the Dravidian movement when the demand for separate
Dravidanad comprising the principal four Dravidian languages
king areas was put forward, the concept gained popularity only
in Tamilnad not elsewhere.
