AGAINST BRAHMANICAL DOMINATION

EMERGENCE OF ANTI-BRAHMANIC MOVEMENT IN THE SOUTH

SUBJECT: COLONIALISM, MODERNITY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS

STUDENT: TANVI BAHUGUNA

M.A PREVIOUS (II SEM)JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

INTRODUCTION

As Marx had correctly said, the ruling ideas of society are the ideas of the ruling class, Brahmans till date, hold importance in the social hierarchy of our country. The ancient lawmaker Manu who is considered the architect of Brahmanical tradition wrote in his Manusmriti:

‘When a Brahman is born he springs to light above the world; he is the chief of all creatures, entitled by eminence of birth to the wealth of the world’1

On the other end of the caste spectrum are the Shudras that included all of the working class like peasants, artisans and workers who were considered impure and born in sin. Brahmanism can be rightly called a hegemonic ideology that has been since time immemorial sustained through cleverly orchestrated rituals and customs.

Also it can be noted that while people belonging to the upper castes have strived to preserve their caste status, the low castes and untouchables or the Dalits have on the contrary tried to do away with it.

Omvedt’s observation of the caste systems in India gives us the perspective that-

‘Sanskrit literature, whether the Dharmashastras, the epics, or any other, refers to varna and caste, the attempt is not to realistically describe the society but to prescribe for it. The references represent projections; the Brahmanic texts are a attempt to delineate an ideal model and impose it on the society. They are a manifesto for a particular form of social inequality.’2

While this gives us a bird’s eye view of what the non-Brahmans perceived of the religious texts, the importance of the Vedic texts cannot be neglected as propagators of caste system.

1 R Ramachandran, Hinduism in the context of Manusmriti, Vedas & Bhagvad Gita, Pg. 2542 Braj Ranjan Mani, Debrahmanising History, Dominance and Resistance in Indian Society, Pg.19

VARNA AND JATI

Manusmriti and Bhagvat Gita interpret Varna in terms of occupations. Brahmans could engage in education, both teaching and learning as well as priesthood; Kshatriyas in military or police forces and administration; Vaishyas could engage in trade or cultivation; however, occupations of Shudras are not mentioned. This might mean that they could undertake any of the occupations not prescribed to the other three varnas. Generally they are duty bound to serve the other three. Irrespective of this occupational divide there have been instances of blurring of boundaries in roles that they were expected to play according to their Varna. Historically there have been Brahmans have also taken up arms and become kings. Some of the well known Brahman dynasties include the Sungas, Kanvas and Satavahanas. Majority of the post Nanda dynasties belonged to the Shudra varna. The Maurya dynasty started by Chandragupta Maurya is one of the many. In the present day, a Vaishya may be a trader, teacher or professional but very rarely a cultivator whereas a number of prominent farming families come from the Shudra varna.

In rural India, caste in the sense of jati has more to do with occupations, especially in the field of agriculture, animal husbandry and other rural based services. There are a number of castes who specialize in agriculture like Jats (Punjab and Uttar Pradesh), Kurmis (Bihar), Marattas (Maharashtra), Khammas and Reddies (Andhra Pradesh), Vellalar (Tamil Nadu), Vokkaligas (Karnataka) etc.

Potters, black smiths, weavers, leather workers, carpenters, goldsmiths and many other traditional occupations are also identified as jatis.

DRAVIDIAN UPSURGE IN SOUTH INDIA

NARAYAN GURU AND KERALA’S LIBERATION MOVEMENT

A state known for its 100 percent literacy rate and administered by a Chief Minister –VS Achuthanandan - who belongs to the so called backward class, Kerala has come a long way. Not long ago, the state was a cauldron of backwardness and untouchability. People from the lower class went through degrading and dehumanizing practices. Practice of ‘theendal’ or distance pollution was very much prevalent in the state at the time.3

Pre-modern Kerala was hierarchically structured according to the varna system. The rules of purity and pollution like untouchability and distance pollution were rigorously followed. The Nambudiri brahmans were at the top of the hierarchy and were ‘purity personified’. Next were the Nayar whose touch could pollute the Nambudiri Brahman. The lowest in the hierarchy were the Ezhavas, who were subjected to the most demeaning practices. Their mere sight could pollute the brahmans and the former were supposed to 3 Braj Ranjan Mani, Debrahmanising History, Dominance and Resistance in Indian Society, Pg. 300

keep a distance of about thirty six feet from a Nambudiri Brahman. They were not allowed to walk on public roads and barred from entering temples. The women folk from the community, whether young or old were supposed to appear in front of the brahmans without covering their chests.4 The Ezhava community formed majority of the population of Kerala and at present is one of the most affluent OBC communities in the state.

Revolt against the indignities of the upper castes began at the turn of the century lead by Ezhava saint Sri Narayan Guru (1856-1928). Born into an Ezhava family he himself was subject to the atrocities faced by people of his community. Revered for his Vedic knowledge and openness to others views and subscription to a non-violent philosophy, he worked for the upliftment of the lower castes. Gandhi of Kerala, as he popularly came to be known as, acted as a catalyst for setting up spiritual foundations for social reform in Kerala that included erstwhile states of Kochi, Travancore and Malabar.5

He was appalled by the misery of the lower castes and the negation of basic human rights in the name of religion by the Brahmans. Shudras and avarnas, who together formed 80 per cent of the total population of the state6, were debarred from entering the sacred domain of religion exclusively enjoyed by the upper castes. This prevented all chances of them of even aspiring to become religious leaders. Such practices and customs prompted Guruswamy to set up a number of debrahmanised temples, ashrams and academic institutions. His moves posed a direct challenge to the upper caste domination and set in motion the process of overthrowing brahmanical hierarchy.

On 10 February 1888 he consecrated the first temple by simply picking up a stone and calling it a Shiva shrine.7 He set up a chain of temples across the state that were open to all including lowest of the low class Pulayas, Parayars and Cherumars. The priests in these temples also belonged to the lower varna setting up a precedents of sorts. Guru was very particular about making the temples centers of learning where people could get some kind of vocational and technical training. ‘Educate that you may be free, and organize that you may be strong’ was his motto to his followers.

He set up the Sree Narayan Dharma Paripalana Yogam (SNDP) with his colleagues and followers in the year 1903. The SNDP strived to spread the ideals of Sree Narayan Dharma for the upliftment of backward and oppressed classes. The Ezhavas were divided into a number of sub castes namely Thiyyas, Chovans, Thendans8 etc. There was no contact amongst people within the sub castes like marriages and practiced superstitions. Guru’s movement helped in bringing the community together and shed baseless customs and rites. The SNDP emerged as a popular movement made an impact across different castes including the Nambudiris and Nayars and made them realize and give up unnecessary beliefs for values that were appropriate for modern times.

4 Ashutosh Varshney, ‘Democracy and Poverty’, Pg. 305 Ezhavas and Thiyyas- A background, http://www.ezhava.net/index.php/Main/Guruswamy6 Braj Ranjan Mani, Debrahmanising History, Dominance and Resistance in Indian Society, Pg. 3017 Ibid 8 Ibid, Pg. 305

Congress nationalism gained ground in the state in the early 1920s but failed to make an impact on the lower castes. The upper caste leadership was constantly attacked for overlooking the plight of the backward classes as even Mahatma Gandhi had failed to live up to the expectations of the people. However, the SNDP leaders made full use of the satyagraha as a tool to make their voices heard. It was innovatively used against caste discrimination in the region. The temple- entry movement initiated by the Congress and inspired by the SNDP was a win-win situation for both the parties but with different motives. Where on the one side, it was a chance to win a minority support base for the Congress, for the SNDP it was a step towards a bigger social movement. But the Congress stand on the issue of castes was obnoxious that can be gauged on the basis of a certain conversation between Gandhi and Narayan Guru where the former defended caste categories by saying that all leaves of the same tree are not identical in shape and texture.9

In the later stages of movements against Brahman hierarchies, the Ezhavas and Pulayas entered into an alliance with Muslims and Christians as well formed the Civil rights league in the year 1919. the SNDP movement can hence be credited with laying the foundation of a new civil society in Kerala that effectively fought for its rights.

IYOTHEE DASS

Iyothee Dass (1845-1914) was a champion of the cause of the non-Brahmans and preceded the rise of the non-Brahman movement in the south. A Dalit by birth he went on to embrace Buddhism. He is also considered as a pioneer of what has come to be known as neo-Buddhism in India. Dass founded the South Indian Buddhist Association which had spread its branches in India as well as abroad by the year 1910.10

Tamil Buddhism was built on the foundation of casteless-ness as the introduction of caste by the Aryans (Brahmans) was believed to have resulted in a ‘discriminatory distinction in public life, both secular as well as sacred’.11

Iyothee Dass played a pivotal role in starting a campaign for education among the low castes and untouchables. He set up a number of schools in areas dominated by low castes wit the help of his colleagues and followers. He was also ran a Tamil weekly, Tamizhan through which he shared his vies on a variety of ideas like untouchability, caste hegemony, indigenous medicine, folk deities, issues involving census and conversion, Jainism and Buddhism in Tamil Nadu.

He was a pioneer amongst the earliest non-Brahmans to critically evaluate brahmanical power, brahman’s role in the modern society and polity and their espousal of problematic nationalism. Iyothee Dass also worked to draw attention towards gross civil injustices and innumerable acts of social and ritual discrimination followed by the Brahmans to

9 Braj Ranjan Mani, Debrahmanising History, Dominance and Resistance in Indian Society, Pg. 31110 Ibid, Pg. 31311 Ibid, pg. 314

ensure dominance. Another aspect of discrimination that he worked against was by Brahman owned press and publicists who were responsible for doctoring public opinion.

JUSTICE PARTY AND E.V.R. NAICKAR

British administrators in Madras Presidency were quick to distinguish Brahmins from Non-Brahmins pertaining their rules and regulations.12 These differences had their impact when started effecting access to resources and power. Madras government was interested in using the state machinery as a tool ‘to reflect or represent the population they governed’.13 This is very much evident from the following order that was issued by the government in August 1919:

‘The time would appear to have now come when it is desirable to obtain in the administrative machinery of this country the services belonging to all various large sections of the community in India and it is impossible to do this unless special facilities are offered to Panchamas (Untouchables) and other backward classes.’14

The government realized that the lower castes needed positive discriminations as there was over representation of Brahmans in the administration. From the year 1892 to 1904, 15 out of 16 recruits in the State Civil Service were Brahmans, as were 77 out of 140 Deputy Collectors and 15 out of 18 Deputy Judges in 1912.15

The process of distinguishing began with the education department segregating first the Hindus into Brahmans and ‘other Hindus’ in the year 1870. By the year 1874, the segregation had changed to Brahmans and ‘Hindus and not Brahmans’. By the early 1880s it was made Brahmans, Vaishyas, Shudras and other Hindus and by the next century it had simply become Brahman and ‘non-Brahman’.16

The lower castes that were included in this dichotomous segregation believed that it would help them come together to form a large group as against the Brahmans. This change is very much evident from the ‘Non Brahman Manifesto’ that marked the formation of the Non-Brahman movement in Madras. The basic argument that was given in the manifesto was that ‘the non-Brahmans’ political interests as compared to the Brahmans who number only about a million and a half, have materially suffered because they ‘maintain no proper organization for protecting or promoting their interests…’17

This paved the way for the formation of the Justice Party that initially had no grassroots support or leadership. Soon after it lost to Congress in Madras Province, the party started looking for a popular face for representation. E.V. Ramaswami became an obvious choice for his anti -Brahman rhetoric. Portraying Brahmans as villains of the society had

12 Christophe Jaffrelot, India’s Silent Revolution: The Rise of The Low Caste in North Indian Politics, Pg. 17213 Ibid14 Ibid15 E.F Irschick, Politics and social conflict in South India, op. cit., Pg. 223 16 Christophe Jaffrelot, India’s Silent Revolution: The Rise of The Low Caste in North Indian Politics, Pg. 17317 Ibid

won him a considerable following in Tamil Nadu.18 The Montague-Chelmsford Act in 1917-18 gave the Justice party a chance to consolidate its support base by asking for representation for non Brahmans.

The Justice Party submitted a memorandum to Montague in December 1917 with a plea to grant reservation to the ‘Non-Brahmans’ in the legislature and all branches of administration. The Montague-Chelmsford report of 1918 denied any representation on the basis community except to the Sikhs and Muslims. KV Reddi Naidu belonging to the Kapu community presented the Party’s demands in front of the Joint Select Committee in London. He put his case in front of the committee on the basis of a strong separate identity of the Non-Brahmans:

‘A basic racial difference that separated the Brahman from the non-Brahman was that former were Aryans and the latter Dravidians’.19

These arguments led the British to accept their claims and granted reserved seats to the non-Brahmans in the Government of India Bill. The concept of non-Brahman and Dravidians became a part and parcel of the party’s ideology from now on. However, not happy with just 28 seats out of 65 being reserved for non-Brahmans, another memorandum was submitted to Lord Chelmsford in April 1920. The memorandum argued on the basis of caste and ethnic differences and justified their claims of more representation by saying:

‘The Brahmans differ from the non-Brahmans in caste, manners, customs and interests and even in personal law in some respects. The former are Aryans and the latter are Dravidian and thus they differ in race. In the past the Brahmans have practically monopolized all or almost all the seats in the Local and Imperial Legislative Councils. The disabilities under which the non-Brahmans have been suffering were fully set out in the Memorandum which Rai Bahadur K.V. Reddi prepared and submitted to the Joint Select Committee on Government of India Bill’.20 The party’s efforts in this direction helped it win the elections and formed the government in the state. However its success in mobilizing and bringing together people belonging to different low castes should not be exaggerated since for instance, it left the Panchamas soon after it gained power.

Later on to give a local appeal to the Justice Party, Ramaswami changed its name to ‘Dravidar Kazhagam’ (Party of the Dravidians). He portrayed himself as standing against the ‘Aryans’ who were again the Brahmans. A mass leader, EVR upset his followers by marrying a very young woman. Thus was formed the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, which is popularly known as the DMK. It was first led by C.N. Annadurai succeeded by M. Karunanidhi who still holds the reigns of the party.

EVR launched a ‘cultural offensive’ against the Brahmans. One of these including staging a reinterpretation of the Ramayana in which Sri Lankan demon king Ravana was

18 Thanthai Periyar, http://www.thanthaiperiyar.org19 Christophe Jaffrelot, India’s Silent Revolution: The Rise of The Low Caste in North Indian Politics, Pg. 174 20 Ibid, pg. 175

turned into a heroic ‘Dravidian of excellent character’ and the Prince Rama, an Aryan was the conniving ‘despicable character’.21

Justice Party became secessionist in nature with its demands of an independent ‘Dravidishan’ for the Dravidians.22 These demands saw there roots in anti-Hindi, anti-north, Dravidian non-Brahmanism passions fuelled by Periyar himself. This lead to strengthening of regional nationalism in Tamil Nadu that worked to overthrow Brahmans from their regional identity. But once the regional claims materialized with the formation of Madras state and non-Brahmans got their share of reservations, Brahmans were again assimilated as members into the Tamil society.

Periyar started the ‘self respect movement’ on the principles of intense anti-Brahmanist racism. The Iyers and Iyenger Brahmans were held responsible for all kinds of direct or indirect suppression of the backward class people. This resulted in an increasing number of attacks on Brahmans and lead to their forced mass-migration. Periyar is also known to have allegedly called for burning down houses of Brahmans and killing them.23

EVR’s followers indulged in desecrating temple icons, cutting sacred threads and tuffs from Brahman priests and also went on to the extent of portraying Brahmans in a derogatory manner in their magazines as well as meetings.The legacy of anti-Brahmanist sentiments was lapped up by the later Dravidian parties. However, it subsided to an extent with the emergence of the AIADMK against the DMK.

ANTI HINDI MOVEMENT

It would not be difficult to guess whether the anti-Hindi movement in South India was actually against Hindi or against the Brahmans. Those fighting for a separate Dravidian land that included present day Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala and Tamil Nadu, were against the imposition of Hindi in the states. However, none of the dominant castes in the regions wanted to come under the Dravidian tag. This was probably because they wished for power in their own languages. This resulted in fizzling out of the movement due to lack of majority support.

Hence, many other options like class, religion, caste and language were considered to unify all the states under the Dravidian banner. Language emerged as a single unifying factor that was capable of bringing the masses together. This brought a shift in the slogan from Dravidian nation to a Tamil nation. This Tamil nation was for those who speak Tamil and not those who are ‘Tamilians’.

21 Thanthai Periyar, http://www.thanthaiperiyar.org22 Ibid23 Ibid

This meant that Tamil Nadu could have non-natives as Chief Ministers without without a shift in its ideology of a Tamil nation. Tamil Nadu has the distinction of being the only South Indian state to have had Chief Ministers of different nativity like MGR, Karunanidhi, Jayalalitha, Annadurai and Janaki Ramachandran.24

Imposition of Hindi in Tamil Nadu started in the year 1937. Congress government of the Madras Presidency under Rajaji introduced Hindi in the school curriculum. This move was instantly met by opposition by the Tamils

Justice party lead by A.D. Panneerselvam and Periyar organized anti Hindi protests in the year 1938. They were arrested and jailed by Rajaji for staging protests. As the movement gained momentum, close to 1200 people, including women and children joined the movement and were imprisoned in 1938.25 Due to widespread protests, teaching of Hindi was withdrawn from schools by the British governor in the year 1940.

Post independence, Hindi in the Devanagari script was introduced as the official language of the Union of India. The debate on the Official Language took place in the Constituent Assembly from September 12 to September 14, 1949. There were two prominent blocs in the Assembly- Pro-Hindi and Anti-Hindi. The Pro-Hindi bloc was further divided into two: i) Hindi bloc represented by P.D. Tandon, Govind Das, Sampurnanand, Ravi Shankar Shukla and K.M. Munshi; ii) Hindustani bloc represented by Jawaharlal Nehru and Azad.26

Since each bloc had its own argument, a national language policy was evolved under Munshi-Ayyangar formula. It had the following salient features27:

Hindi is the official rather than the national language of India [Art.343 (1)]. English is to be retained for a period of fifteen years from the date of implementation of the

Constitution i.e. 1950 [Art.343 (2)].

Claims of the regional languages were upheld through the VIII schedule.

Hindi-Hindustani conflicts were resolved through the ambiguous directive of Art. 357.

A report submitted by the Committee of Parliament on Official Language headed by GB Pant in February 1959 mentioned that Hindi be accepted as the principal language whereas English be accepted as the subsidiary language. It also said that there will be no target date for the switch over. This report angered people in the non-Hindi regions.

Union language Convention held by the Academy of Telugu in 1956 resented the imposition of Hindi in South India. It was also angered by the decision of switching English to Hindi. All India Language Conference held in 1958 passed a resolution that 24 Voice of the Voiceless: Political Implosion, http://tamilnadudalits.blogspot.com, Tuesday, April 27, 201025 Thanthai Periyar, http://www.thanthaiperiyar.org26 Language Movements in India: Language Movements against Hindi as an Official Language, http://www.ciil-ebooks.net27 Ibid

English should be continued as the Union language without setting up a time limit. C Rajagopalachari who was once a supporter of elevating Hindi to the status of the official and national language also participated in the convention. He remarked-

"Hindi is as much as foreign language to the non-Hindi speaking people as English to the protagonists of Hindi"28

These developments as in the case of any other movement being fought passionately on linguistic or communal lines gave a chance to the political parties to jump into the debate to realize their political ambitions. In this case it was the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) that strived to fight against Hindi dominance. The party organized the Madras State Anti-Hindi Conference in January 1965.

The conference declared January 26, 1965 as a day of mourning.29 The movement saw large scale participation by students and in no time took a violent turn. Tamil Nadu Students Anti-Hindi agitation Council was also formed that got involved in acts of burning down boards at railway stations written in Hindi.

As passions rose, so did the intensity of the movement with state wide processions by college students, a couple of DMK workers burnt themselves to death publicly and in one of the extreme instances close to seventy people were allegedly killed in an encounter with the state police.30

Anti-Hindi movement of the South can thus be seen to a larger extent a movement opposed to Hindi domination. This can also lead us further to believe that opposition against Hindi domination was seen as bid to break free from the so called Aryan dominance and move ahead in creating a Dravidian state.

ARYAN-DRAVIDIAN DIVIDE

German Indologist Max Mueller is credited with coming up with the concept of Aryan invasion theory in the 19th century. According to this theory, Aryans invaded northern India around 1500 BC. It is believed that this light skinned, nomadic race of people destroyed the earlier civilization that was supposedly more advanced and lived in the Indus Valley. The natives were identified as either Dravidians or Austrics, or the present day Shudras.

The whole theory revolves around the belief that Arya is a racial group that invaded the original inhabitants and whose native place was outside India. There have been many theories and counter theories to support the argument as well as to oppose it. It is also worth noticing that nowhere in Indian literature the word ‘Arya’ finds mention as a

28 Ibid29 Tongue tied, India Today, December 20, 2007, http://indiatoday.intoday.in30 Language Movements in India: Language Movements against Hindi as an Official Language, http://www.ciil-ebooks.net

separate race. The word ‘Arya’ in Sanskrit is defined as a noble person and not a race. The famous Amarakosa gives the following definition31:

‘mahakula kulinarya sabhya sajjana sadhavah’(An Arya is one who hails from a noble family, of gentle behavior and demeanor, good-natured and of righteous conduct)

The word also finds mention in Ramayana where it describes Rama as ‘Arya who worked for the equality of all and was dear to everyone’.32

‘arya sarva samascaiva sadaiva priyadarsanah’

ANTI BRAHMANISM

Anti- Brahmanical sentiment is witnessed in three states: Karnataka, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. There was felt a need to reform and revive Hinduism during the advent of Islam. Hindus started questioning their beliefs and practices and the prevalent caste system to match Islam’s claim of a unitary and universal religion that made no discrimination whatsoever amongst its believers.

Slogans of ‘Equality and fraternity’ were made popular by reformists who wanted to fight Islam at the so called ideological level. Caste came to be seen as a stumbling block in the way of social uniformity and the ‘reformers’ made attempts to remove it completely. But something that was so deeply rooted in our social structures could not have gone so easily. Caste provided people a kind of safety net that gave them their social and ethnic identity.

Foundations of the Vijayanagara Empire were laid in south India by Vidyaranya to stem expansion of Islam in the region unlike the North which was already collapsing under its onslaught. Along with this, Bhasaveshwara, a social reformer and philosopher made attempts to create a sense of ethnic pride amongst the masses. The emergence of the Lingayat movement helped in containing the spread of Islam in the South.

Although the two ethnic groups the Lingayats and Kannadas worked together in this direction somehow they developed mutual suspicion on the basis of their ethnic differences. Ethnic assertion by the Kannada speaking groups was understood to be anti- Sanatana Hinduism. As a reaction to it their emerged a movement anti-Brahman in nature. This movement is recognized as one the oldest anti-Brahmanist movement in India.33

Rabid anti-Brahmanisation was prevalent in Maharashtra, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. Macaulay’s new educational system is termed as the starting point of the whole anti-

31 Aryan Invasion- History or Politics?, by N.S. Rajaram, Archaelogy Online, http://www.archaeologyonline.net32 Ibid

33 http://alt.nntp2http.com

Brahman sentiment. Madras Presidency, which was one of the first to go under British administration, had an indigenous educational system in place.

There were single teacher schools that drew students from both Brahman and non-Brahman communities. Even the untouchables got the chance to educate their children under this system. These schools were managed by grants from the state and fees or donations from the students.

However, the new system stopped these grants and recruitments were made on the basis of approvals acquired from state approved schools. Another blow that the new system gave to the people was that education became costlier and thus became urban centered and elitist. Teachers too had to bear the brunt of this system with the loss of state grants that had served as a major source of their income.

It came as a blow to both Brahman and non-Brahman teachers. But where there were a few lucky ones who still got a chance to work, there were many others who were deprived of any such opportunities. Non-Brahmans living in areas that were under the control of the maths still got a chance to work as compared to those non-Brahmans living in the deprived areas.

Non-Brahmans who were unfortunate enough to not get employment misunderstood that the British were favoring the Brahmans. This sparked off an anti-Brahman sentiment in the area. Another major factor that added fuel to the fire was the return of the Chettiars from Burma, where they had amassed enormous wealth and power. On their return they had to suddenly defer to the local Brahmans even if they were not as wealthy as the Chettiars.34

Even if these developments were not enough to stoke anti-Brahman sentiments, Lal Bahadur Shastri sparked off another debate with his move to make Hindi the official language of the country.

CONCLUSION

Over the years, the issues that have been raised by the low castes across the length and breadth of the country have been concerning basic human and citizenship rights. In the pre-independence times, when the ‘nationalists’ were demanding a greater share in the colonial pie and later for complete independence, the low castes had to protest and agitate for access to roads, markets, schools, the right of their women to cover their breasts etc. These daily struggles were not waged against the imperialist but against their own brethren who had subjected them to atrocities on the basis of their castes.

For every movement the role of a leader who can mobilize masses holds utmost importance. Gandhi who was considered as a champion of the oppressed classes throughout the North did not have a mass base in the South. This void was aptly filled by 34 http://alt.nntp2http.com

charismatic leaders like Iyothee and Periyar and innumerable other leaders. But of these Periyar has enjoyed the distinction of being one of the foremost leaders who started the anti-Brahman movement on a large scale.

Periyar in the form of his Self Respect Movement mobilized masses driving them to the extent of widespread violence. His appeal to burn the national flag in the height of the anti-Hindi movement got a huge response. His party enjoyed the maximum benefits of the North-South animosity by organizing Ravan Leela in madras, where effigies of Rama, Lakshama and Sita were burnt.

To such characteristics of a charismatic leader of the stature of Periyar, Wallis and Bruce have remarked that the “dynamics of charismatic leadership can thus provide opportunities for charismatic leaders to indulge the darker forces of their subconscious.”

Also the whole debate of the great Aryan-Dravidian divide that formed the basis of the anti-Brahman movement has been very recently proved wrong by a number of independent studies by researchers. One of the studies undertaken by Harvard and a group of indigenous researchers on ‘ancestral Indian populations’, has concluded that there is a genetic relationship between all Indians. More importantly, the research claims that the so called fact that Aryans and Dravidians signify the ancestry of north and south might be a myth.35

With such studies busting the myth regarding the great north-south divide, the very foundation of political parties like the DMK and the earlier Justice Party stands questioned.

35 Aryan-Dravidian divide a myth: Study, TOI, September 25, 2009, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Baker, C.J., The Politics of South India 1920-37 (Delhi: Vikas, 1976)

Bayly, Susan, Caste, Society and Politics in India: From the Eighteenth Century to the Modern Age (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000)

Berreman, Gerald D., ‘The Brahmanical View of Caste’, in Dipankar Gupta, ed., Social Stratification, pp. 84-92 (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1991)

Biswas, Swapan K., Gods, False Gods and the Untouchables (Delhi: Orion, 1998)

Ambedkar, B.R., Who were the Shudras? (1946); The Untouchables (1948), in BAWS, vol. 7.

Bougle, C., ‘The Essence and Reality of the Caste System’, in Dipankar Gupta, ed., Social Stratification, pp. 64-73 (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1991)

Dharma Theertha, Swami, History of Hindu Imperialism, 1941, rpt. (Madras: Dalit Educational Literature Centre, 1992)