Hi,
I am a Tamil christian vellala, my ancestors were sozha and saiva pillais from near tiruvarur and from another side of the family from palayamkottai.I saw this thread about hatred for brahmins in Tamil Nadu. I felt I could add another perspective to this great forum and take this discussion in a different direction.
There have been brahmins in the tamil country since very ancient times. However I see two periods in history when there were new influx of brahmin immigrants to the tamil country. Of course there would have been constant movement of people throughout history but documented large scale settlements occured during the reign of Rajaraja chola and again five centuries later during Vijayanagar rule.
Brahmins who settled in tamil country had fairly well established roles which was as priests, teachers, tutors and accountants. But it was primarily I believe as sustainers of religious culture and as a bulwark of Shaivite faith that the later Chola kings patronised brahmins and made huge grants of land to the brahmin run temples.
After the fall of the tamil dynasties in the 13th century there was a long period of poltical flux and invasions. Then the political establishment stabilised with the Vijayanagar rule during which time a new class of brahmins came to the tamil country then again with the Maratha rulers.
A bit about the the well known non varna system of tamil society. Tamil society was never governed by the varna system and I really doubt if any society in India really was in a 'water tight' manner. The main proponents were the brahmins who sought to understand and later 'fit' tamil society into this system. Social groups were not very defined and there was mobility on the social scale at various levels in most parts of India and more especially in tamil country.
Brahmins by nature of their established role in society favoured the maintance of status quo. Yet were amenable to change when it was worthwhile or inevitable. A bit about Vellalas, unlike present configurations the Vellala were a hugely diverse group of people not necessarily of the same stock. You must realize tht the Vellala group is not confined to the tamil ethnic group of today. There are the ballalas and tuluva vellalas of karnataka and vellalas of kerala and the telugu rajas and more distantly the reddis. The term denoted a agricultural class and which actually reveled in its 'agricultural culture'. This group gave rise to ruler classes as evidenced by the sozha vellalas, the karkatha (pandya) vellalas and the vellala gounders (cheras). And in turn were not totally cut off from the maravar classes currently classified as thevars and kallars. The maravar groups were in turn small farmers when there no wars. The vellalas were also merchants and when the nagrathars settled in tamil country in another millenia they are documented to have married sozha vellala girls.
Now coming to the discussion, the current dislike of brahmins has of course a long history. You read about similar feeling during the heyday of buddism and jainism. That was because people associated the ills of the Hindu faith with the principal and most visible proponents. But in tamilnadu the reasons are a little different as brahmins were essentially invited to practice the ancient faith of shaivism in tamilnadu. Brahmins who came even in chola times came from a more sanskritised society and had links to ancient heart of sanskrit culture the ganges basin. They could not fully grasp the structure of tamil society and constantly strived to mould it into its northern counterparts. I believe when the later cholas invited and settled Brahmins in the cauvery basin they made a conscious choice to integrate with the Sanskrit culture of other parts. However they wanted to do it on their own terms. But when the later groups of Brahmins moved to tamil country they were able to be more vocal with their concept of society. They as the ancient rules prescribed saw agriculture as the work of shudras but this remained in the realm of esoteric discussion as the vellala groups lrgely held ownership of land through the nayak and maratha periods. But there were changes in the Vellala groups as a result of the Brahmin interaction. I believe the occurence of the vaishnava vellalas are a result of these cultural interactions.
A new phase opened when Europeans first came to India. The Europeans first sought to use the land owning groups as their liaisons in their power centres. These liasions were in tamil country the vellala landowners who looked for social ascendancy within their own groups. Yet they were not cooperative enough for the british and with the slow decline of Indian princes the English wanted a more academic and clerical civil staff to govern the empire. Thus it was during the late 1700s and the early 1800s that the Brahmins began to take up English education and work for the british. It was symbiotic relationship, the Brahmins who till that time did not have socially authorized access to land or wealth found a new calling which suited their abilities. It was during this period that the real rifts started. Brahmins moved from clerical jobs to academic endeavors. The links of sanskrit to german and other European languages gave rise to a new ethnic theory with proponents from the European and Indian academia. The Aryan theory was reborn in a new light with the Europeans cast as Western Aryan and the Brahmins and select higher caste groups as Indo-Europeans. This found hearty support in the anglicized Brahmin groups in India. In Tamil Nadu this social theorizing gave rise to various theories. This new Indo-European theory was combined with the north Indian varna concept to produce a more vocal Dravida-Shudra concept. This was being put onto serious academic discussions by the second half of the 19th century. This theory had varying reaction from the land owning groups some who were 'hindu believers' and in fact most of tamil society were accommodating the dravida-shudra theory by creating a 'sat-shudra' entity. But there were others who saw this as a Brahmin ploy to 'build into' the system the new scheme of things under British patronage - the immigrants now trying to take the upper hand in socio-political arrangements. By the early 1900s there were Vellalas, Naickers and Reddis who were grouping to reverse this development. The avenues which they employed varied.
This was accompanied by an altogether new behavior among Brahmins, in several places in the Cauvery basin. Land had been granted to temples by the chola kings and farmed by tenant farmers and the income passed onto temple coffers in the ideal scheme of things. There was a new move by several Brahmin families to appropriate temple land and using the British government changed the ownership of these prime agricultural tracts to private ownership. This created a new class of Brahmin mirasdars. This broke an ancient rule where Brahmins were not allowed to be directly involved in agriculture and created a new land owning group in direct and serious competition to the Vellala land owners.
By the 1900s political developments added another aggravating factor- the Congress party. The congress was almost overwhelmingly an association of anglicized Brahmins who kept everyone else out. This on a national scene meant that once the british were out the new direct rulers would be Brahmins a first in Indian history. So the scene among the tamil non Brahmins got heated up. Rajaji choosing Kamaraj Nadar was seen by the Vellala elite as a deliberate ploy to by pass them to get to the lower castes. The rationalist theories of Periyar were probably an unexpected unifying factor. These ideologies created a 'Dravidian' movement which started to demonify Hinduism in its ancient stronghold. And portrayed Brahmins as caricatures to be hated. This naturally did not hold well as is seen from the separation of the DMK from the DK and again the formation of the AIADMK.
Yet the path once taken took a life of its own. I believe that Brahmins are yet to understand and grasp the ancient structure of tamil society. They should also understand that Tamil society had created a non-sanskritic culture with an emphasis on agriculture and overseas trade from very ancient times. This was independent of the Vedic civilization of the North. However tamil society took what it liked from the Sanskrit culture and tamil merchants took the Ramayana epic to the Far East. That being said tamil society was more fluid than that in other parts of India. Brahmins in the late 1800s and early 1900s in Tamil Nadu were in social conflict with the other high castes with whom they had lived for centuries. At the core was a social re-arrangement among several others which took a relatively economically impoverished priestly class and transformed it into a land owning class which wielded direct political power. The equations are still being written.
I would urge everyone everywhere however to look beyond these issues and appreciate each other and cherish this new gift of India. I call it new because as anyone can see 60 years is a very short period and nations like relationships can be broken and out of broken relationships comes hatred. The north Indians need to appreciate the quiet living of the south and the southerners have admire the entrepreneurial qualities of the northern merchant classes. The Vellalas and other groups have to appreciate the discipline and academic qualities of the Brahmins and Brahmins and all of Indian society should admire the ancient agricultural and merchant classes of the south and stop applying the varna classifications. Not just in public but in the privacy of their homes and hearts.
I am a Tamil christian vellala, my ancestors were sozha and saiva pillais from near tiruvarur and from another side of the family from palayamkottai.I saw this thread about hatred for brahmins in Tamil Nadu. I felt I could add another perspective to this great forum and take this discussion in a different direction.
There have been brahmins in the tamil country since very ancient times. However I see two periods in history when there were new influx of brahmin immigrants to the tamil country. Of course there would have been constant movement of people throughout history but documented large scale settlements occured during the reign of Rajaraja chola and again five centuries later during Vijayanagar rule.
Brahmins who settled in tamil country had fairly well established roles which was as priests, teachers, tutors and accountants. But it was primarily I believe as sustainers of religious culture and as a bulwark of Shaivite faith that the later Chola kings patronised brahmins and made huge grants of land to the brahmin run temples.
After the fall of the tamil dynasties in the 13th century there was a long period of poltical flux and invasions. Then the political establishment stabilised with the Vijayanagar rule during which time a new class of brahmins came to the tamil country then again with the Maratha rulers.
A bit about the the well known non varna system of tamil society. Tamil society was never governed by the varna system and I really doubt if any society in India really was in a 'water tight' manner. The main proponents were the brahmins who sought to understand and later 'fit' tamil society into this system. Social groups were not very defined and there was mobility on the social scale at various levels in most parts of India and more especially in tamil country.
Brahmins by nature of their established role in society favoured the maintance of status quo. Yet were amenable to change when it was worthwhile or inevitable. A bit about Vellalas, unlike present configurations the Vellala were a hugely diverse group of people not necessarily of the same stock. You must realize tht the Vellala group is not confined to the tamil ethnic group of today. There are the ballalas and tuluva vellalas of karnataka and vellalas of kerala and the telugu rajas and more distantly the reddis. The term denoted a agricultural class and which actually reveled in its 'agricultural culture'. This group gave rise to ruler classes as evidenced by the sozha vellalas, the karkatha (pandya) vellalas and the vellala gounders (cheras). And in turn were not totally cut off from the maravar classes currently classified as thevars and kallars. The maravar groups were in turn small farmers when there no wars. The vellalas were also merchants and when the nagrathars settled in tamil country in another millenia they are documented to have married sozha vellala girls.
Now coming to the discussion, the current dislike of brahmins has of course a long history. You read about similar feeling during the heyday of buddism and jainism. That was because people associated the ills of the Hindu faith with the principal and most visible proponents. But in tamilnadu the reasons are a little different as brahmins were essentially invited to practice the ancient faith of shaivism in tamilnadu. Brahmins who came even in chola times came from a more sanskritised society and had links to ancient heart of sanskrit culture the ganges basin. They could not fully grasp the structure of tamil society and constantly strived to mould it into its northern counterparts. I believe when the later cholas invited and settled Brahmins in the cauvery basin they made a conscious choice to integrate with the Sanskrit culture of other parts. However they wanted to do it on their own terms. But when the later groups of Brahmins moved to tamil country they were able to be more vocal with their concept of society. They as the ancient rules prescribed saw agriculture as the work of shudras but this remained in the realm of esoteric discussion as the vellala groups lrgely held ownership of land through the nayak and maratha periods. But there were changes in the Vellala groups as a result of the Brahmin interaction. I believe the occurence of the vaishnava vellalas are a result of these cultural interactions.
A new phase opened when Europeans first came to India. The Europeans first sought to use the land owning groups as their liaisons in their power centres. These liasions were in tamil country the vellala landowners who looked for social ascendancy within their own groups. Yet they were not cooperative enough for the british and with the slow decline of Indian princes the English wanted a more academic and clerical civil staff to govern the empire. Thus it was during the late 1700s and the early 1800s that the Brahmins began to take up English education and work for the british. It was symbiotic relationship, the Brahmins who till that time did not have socially authorized access to land or wealth found a new calling which suited their abilities. It was during this period that the real rifts started. Brahmins moved from clerical jobs to academic endeavors. The links of sanskrit to german and other European languages gave rise to a new ethnic theory with proponents from the European and Indian academia. The Aryan theory was reborn in a new light with the Europeans cast as Western Aryan and the Brahmins and select higher caste groups as Indo-Europeans. This found hearty support in the anglicized Brahmin groups in India. In Tamil Nadu this social theorizing gave rise to various theories. This new Indo-European theory was combined with the north Indian varna concept to produce a more vocal Dravida-Shudra concept. This was being put onto serious academic discussions by the second half of the 19th century. This theory had varying reaction from the land owning groups some who were 'hindu believers' and in fact most of tamil society were accommodating the dravida-shudra theory by creating a 'sat-shudra' entity. But there were others who saw this as a Brahmin ploy to 'build into' the system the new scheme of things under British patronage - the immigrants now trying to take the upper hand in socio-political arrangements. By the early 1900s there were Vellalas, Naickers and Reddis who were grouping to reverse this development. The avenues which they employed varied.
This was accompanied by an altogether new behavior among Brahmins, in several places in the Cauvery basin. Land had been granted to temples by the chola kings and farmed by tenant farmers and the income passed onto temple coffers in the ideal scheme of things. There was a new move by several Brahmin families to appropriate temple land and using the British government changed the ownership of these prime agricultural tracts to private ownership. This created a new class of Brahmin mirasdars. This broke an ancient rule where Brahmins were not allowed to be directly involved in agriculture and created a new land owning group in direct and serious competition to the Vellala land owners.
By the 1900s political developments added another aggravating factor- the Congress party. The congress was almost overwhelmingly an association of anglicized Brahmins who kept everyone else out. This on a national scene meant that once the british were out the new direct rulers would be Brahmins a first in Indian history. So the scene among the tamil non Brahmins got heated up. Rajaji choosing Kamaraj Nadar was seen by the Vellala elite as a deliberate ploy to by pass them to get to the lower castes. The rationalist theories of Periyar were probably an unexpected unifying factor. These ideologies created a 'Dravidian' movement which started to demonify Hinduism in its ancient stronghold. And portrayed Brahmins as caricatures to be hated. This naturally did not hold well as is seen from the separation of the DMK from the DK and again the formation of the AIADMK.
Yet the path once taken took a life of its own. I believe that Brahmins are yet to understand and grasp the ancient structure of tamil society. They should also understand that Tamil society had created a non-sanskritic culture with an emphasis on agriculture and overseas trade from very ancient times. This was independent of the Vedic civilization of the North. However tamil society took what it liked from the Sanskrit culture and tamil merchants took the Ramayana epic to the Far East. That being said tamil society was more fluid than that in other parts of India. Brahmins in the late 1800s and early 1900s in Tamil Nadu were in social conflict with the other high castes with whom they had lived for centuries. At the core was a social re-arrangement among several others which took a relatively economically impoverished priestly class and transformed it into a land owning class which wielded direct political power. The equations are still being written.
I would urge everyone everywhere however to look beyond these issues and appreciate each other and cherish this new gift of India. I call it new because as anyone can see 60 years is a very short period and nations like relationships can be broken and out of broken relationships comes hatred. The north Indians need to appreciate the quiet living of the south and the southerners have admire the entrepreneurial qualities of the northern merchant classes. The Vellalas and other groups have to appreciate the discipline and academic qualities of the Brahmins and Brahmins and all of Indian society should admire the ancient agricultural and merchant classes of the south and stop applying the varna classifications. Not just in public but in the privacy of their homes and hearts.
