Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v2.c18.s1.t1: C. Colonization of the South and Some Social Questions at Issue
Social and Political Life in the Vijayanagara Empire (A.D. 1346 – A.D. 1646) v2.c18.s1.t1
- Language
- English
C. Colonization of the South and Some Social Questions at Issue
v2.c18.s1.t1.1
The influx of the northern communities into the south was not without its abiding effects on the social history of the people. They are generally called by the name Baḍuga, Baḍaga, or Vaḍucker. Some maintain that the most prominent among the northern colonists were the Telugu Toṭṭiyans or the Kambaḷattārs mentioned elsewhere.² This assumption is strengthened by the notices in tradition of the heads of the Doṭiyah people who followed the fortunes of Nāgama Nāyaka to the south, and who were rewarded by him with the seventy-two pāḷeyams described in an earlier connection.³ While it is not improbable that the Telugu people may have been called by the name Baḍaga from the fact of their having hailed from the north (or baḍagu), it would be more proper to include in that general appellation other people also who were not Telugus. For it is quite likely that the Karṇāṭaka rulers—such as the monarchs of Vijayanagara essentially were till the rise of the Āraviṭi family,—may have also induced the people of the Karṇāṭaka to settle in the fertile regions of the south. Our assumption that the term Toṭṭiyans could not have referred only to those who came from the Telugu land is supported by the statement of an inscription dated A. D. 1369, which, as we have seen, speaks of the Toṭṭiyans of Pulliyūr-nāḍu. Moreover, the colonists who went to the south were also made up of people like the Paṭṭu-nūlkārans of Surat who were certainly not of the Telugu origin.⁴
v2.c18.s1.t1.2
² Rangachari, I. A., XLIII, pp. 135-6. On some notices on the Baḍugas, see Heras, Q.J.M.S., XV, p. 182, n (40); Aravidu, p. 150, n (4)
v2.c18.s1.t1.3
³ Taylor, ibid.; O.H.MSS., II, p. 21, op. cit.
v2.c18.s1.t1.4
⁴ Nelson, Mad. Country p. 87.
v2.c18.s1.t1.5
When the Baḍagas or northerners migrated to the south, a social upheaval was bound to follow, in spite of the endeavours of the monarchs to maintain the sakala-varṇāśrama *dharma* of the people.¹ It manifested itself in various problems some of which we shall deal with here. Firstly, there was the question of the change in the status of the earlier inhabitants. The new-comers entered the Tamil land essentially in their capacity as conquerors; and the old inhabitants found themselves consequently relegated to a lower position in social and political spheres. This may have been one of the causes why the ancient classes were compelled to give up their traditional profession and to take up menial work. The Śemmans, for example, who were originally Tamil leather weavers, sank to the position of menial servants in the village after the advent of the Telugu or Kannaḍa Mādigas.² Perhaps it was during this age, when the hereditary trades of the old inhabitants were usurped by the new-comers, that there arose the nefarious distinction between caste and caste, person and person, culminating in what has been known in our own days as the institution of untouchability. If this is admitted, then the degradation of such an ancient community like the Paraiyans, from the position of minor servants of the village *āyagāras* and masters of the soil, to that of slaves and unclean classes is not unintelligible.
v2.c18.s1.t1.6
¹ Wilks compares the Telugu colonists with the Roman colonists. Sketches, I, p. 15, (1810); I, p. 9, (1869). See also Caldwell, *History of Tinnevelly*, p. 48; Rangachari, *I. A.*, XLIII, p. 113.
v2.c18.s1.t1.7
² Srinivasa Aiyangar, *Tamil Studies*, p. 85.
v2.c18.s1.t1.8
Coupled with this exchange of duties that resulted in the older inhabitants being compelled to take up menial work of all sorts, there is another fact which may have also been responsible for the degradation of the earlier inhabitants. This was their close relationship with the foreigners, some of whom unfortunately won for themselves notoriety in the country. It is a deplorable fact that the morality of the Portuguese was at a hopelessly low ebb, especially in Goa. Linschoten, for example, gives a long and painful description of the state of affairs about the Portuguese in that city.³ Even so late as A. D. 1623 Pietro della Valle wrote thus in connection with the Portuguese: "For being themselves in these matters very unrestrain'd (not sparing their nearest kindred, nor, as I have heard, their own Sisters, much less their Foster-children in their Houses) they conceive that all other Nations are like themselves...".¹ Both because of political and commercial reasons the Portuguese were constrained to be on the most intimate terms with the people of Vijayanagara. In an era when orthodoxy was allowed to dictate terms in almost every sphere of life in the Hindu Empire, and when there were no organized attempts on the part of the Hindus to understand the civilization of the foreigners, it is not surprising that a people like the Paraiyans, forced to seek service under the foreigners, should have been declared to be outside the pale of the uncompromising society of those days. Whether we are correct in assuming this or not, we may note that the worst types of orthodoxy have always been found in those parts of the south where the Portuguese have most freely mingled with the people,— Malabar, Cochin, Travancore and the region round Madura.²
v2.c18.s1.t1.9
³ Linschoten, *Purchas, Pilgrims*, X, pp. 240-2.
v2.c18.s1.t1.10
¹ Pietro della Valle, *Travels* I, p. 161. See also ibid., p. 161, n (1); Mandelslso, *Travels*, Lib. II, p. 84. (Davies); Sarkar, *Pos. Back.*, I, p. 72. It is a well known fact that menial servants of Europeans in southern India have been, as they are to this day, Holeyas and Paraiyans. B. A. S.
v2.c18.s1.t1.11
² In the Karnataka also we have the same state of affairs; but the history of that region contains at least one place where the Holeyas are permitted to enter a temple. This is at Melukote. See *E. C.*, II, p. 180, n. (7) (1st ed.). For a detailed account of the social and religious privileges enjoyed by the Paraiyans, read Oppert *M.J.L.S.* for 1887-8, *Org. Inhab.*, p. 78, seq. On some interesting remarks on the Paraiyans and Valaiyans, see Cammiade, *Q.J.M.S.* X, p. 156.
v2.c18.s1.t1.12
The reason why ideas of pollution should have ever risen in the minds of the people is because of another consideration which may have been the result of the migration of the Bada-gas to the south. This was as regards the social divisions and the consequent rigidity of the caste system.³ We shall deal with some aspects of these in connection with social legislation under Vijayanagara. How poets and moralists of the mediaeval times waged war against the growing danger of caste rigidity and untouchability, which were eating into the life of the Hindu people, is told by Sarvajña, Kanaka Dāsa, Kapilar, and Vēmana, whose exquisite poems add to the rich heritage of the Karṇāṭaka and Telugu poetry.¹ We may be permitted to quote two verses from Sarvajña and Vēmana on the question of untouchability. Thus says Sarvajña:
v2.c18.s1.t1.13
³ An inscription dated A. D. 1433 begins thus: "Superior to the Varnashramas, superior to caste differences, superior to karmas, freed from avarice-Akhanda muni do I reverence, the chief of munis". *E. C.*, VIII, Tl. 14, p. 165.
v2.c18.s1.t1.14
¹ Branett, The Heart of India, pp. 94, seq., 109, seq., Rice, Kan. Lit. p. 73. (2nd ed.), for the date of Sarvajña. But see Kavicharite, II., pp. 532-3.
v2.c18.s1.t1.15
జాతిహీనర మనయ జ్యోతి తాం హీనవే?
జాతివిజాతీయెనబేడ ! దేవనొలి
దాతనే జాత ! సర్వజ్ఞ !
యాతవిదుహువేను? నాకరదు సాలదే?
జాతివిజాతీయెనబేడ ! దేవనొలి
దాతనే జాత సర్వజ్ఞ ! ²
v2.c18.s1.t1.16
² Sarvajña, Kittel, Anthology, p. 106. Cf. Rice, Kan. Lit., p. 73.
v2.c18.s1.t1.17
This may be compared with the following by Vēmana:
v2.c18.s1.t1.18
మాలవానినేల మహిమీద నిందింప
వొదల రక్తమాంస మొక్కటిగాదె ?
వానిలోన మెలుగువాని కులంబేది ?
మాలవానినంటి మునినీళ్లుమునిగేరు,
మాలకర్మచేత మాలడయ్యె,
నేలదెలియలేరో యీపరపశువులు,
మాదిగెమనవద్దు పరిగుణమెు సరిన,
మాదిగని వసిష్ఠు, మగువ కేదె,
మాదిగె గుణమున్న మరి ద్విజాడగునయా ?³
v2.c18.s1.t1.19
³ Vēmana, Verses, Bk. III., vv. 227-9, p. 148 (Brown). "Why should he constantly revile the Pariar? Are not his flesh and blood the same as our men? And of what caste is He who pervades the Pariar as well as all other men? Why should you plunge in water to purify yourself if a Pariar touches you? He becomes what he is in consequence of sins in a former birth: how stupid are those who cannot understand this? Call not him an out caste who possesses a good disposition. Did not the hermit Vasistha take a Pariar wife? How can he be called a Brahman whose qualities are those of a Pariar"? See also ibid., vv. 128, 217-220.
v2.c18.s1.t1.20
The rigidity of the caste system was in itself in some measure responsible for another outstanding feature of the times—the attempts made by the lower castes to acquire the privileges enjoyed by the members of the higher classes. This is evident from the few notices we have of a section called the Vipravinōdins¹. From the way in which Vēmana derides the endeavours of those who longed to aspire to the status of higher castes, we may infer that in the latter half of the seventeenth century, if not in the Vijayanagara age itself, some of the lower orders must have asserted their own individuality and claimed a sort of equality with the higher castes. Vēmana says:
v2.c18.s1.t1.21
¹ Vipravinōdins, as explained by Mr. Brown, were a class of Brahman jugglers. In the Ganjam and Vizagapatam districts, the Vipravinōdins are no longer Brahmans but Śūdras. It is evident that the profession followed by the Vipravinōdins must have lowered them in rank, in later times. *E. Report* for 1913, p. 123.
v2.c18.s1.t1.22
శూద్రతనముపోయె, శూద్రుగానని,
ద్విజుడనుకొను పెల్ల కేలనేమి
ఇత్తదేశగు పనిది యీదస వచ్చువా ?²
v2.c18.s1.t1.23
² "To say 'Śūdraism has left me, I am no Śūdra, I am a Brahman' is all folly; though brass resembles gold, can it be esteemed its equal?" Vēmana, *Verses*, Bk. II, v. 96. p. 74 (Brown). Śukrāchārya himself was no advocate of the sanctity of birth. "Not by birth are the Brāhmaṇa, Kshatriya, Vaiśya, Śūdra and Mlēchchha separated, but by virtues and works. Are all descended from Brahmā to be called Brāhmaṇa? Neither through colour nor through ancestors can the spirit, worthy of a Brahman be generated". *Sukraniti*, I, ll. 75-8. p. 8. Evidently a movement to relax the rigidity of the caste system had already been set on foot in the middle ages. B.A.S.
v2.c18.s1.t1.24
The Vipravinōdins are mentioned in Vijayanagara times. Certain Vipravinōdins undertook in Śaka 1476 (A. D. 1554-5), in the reign of Sadāśiva Rāya, to perform the Kārtika pūjā of the god Hanumanta of the agrahāra village Raganahāḷu, situated in the Uruvakonda-sīme attached to the Rayadurga-
v2.c18.s1.t1.25
223-5, 231, 235-7, pp. 81, 146, 147, 149, 150. This liberal spirit is really to be traced to the early times of Tamil history. We have the following in Nāḷadiyār:—
v2.c18.s1.t1.26
"When men speak of 'good caste' and 'bad caste' it is a mere form of speech, and has no real meaning. Not even by possessions, made by ancient glories, but by self-denial, learning, and energy is *caste* determined." Ch. XX, 195, p. 125, (Pope).
v2.c18.s1.t1.27
vēṇṭhe in the Mūḍa-nāḍu district of the Hastināvāli-valita.¹ Two years later (Śaka 1478) some Vipravinōdins made a grant of the Vipravinōdi income realized from the agrahāra-village Chinahōtūru in Vurōkoṇḍa-vēṇṭhe for the Dhanurmāsa worship of the god Chennakēśvara of the same village.² In the same year (Śaka 1478=A.D. 1556-7), a gift (of taxes and dues) was made by a number of Vipravinōdins, who belonged to various śākhās and sūtras, to the mahājanas of Chauḷuru.³ An undated inscription, assignable to the times of Sadāśiva Rāya, informs us that a gift of lamps was made for the temple of Hanumaṅta-dēva at Manneya-samudra, surnamed Dēvarāya-pura, which was an agrahāra in Penugoṇḍa-rājya, for the merit of all Vipravinōdins.⁴ The Vipravinōdin community in Śaka 1480 (A.D. 1558-9) made a gift of the Vipravinōdi income from the village of Guntakallu to the gods Mūlasthāna Bhōgīśvara, Kēśava Perumāḷ, and Vīrēśvara of the same place.⁵
v2.c18.s1.t1.28
¹ 402 of 1920.
v2.c18.s1.t1.29
² 403 of 1920. Chinahōtūru is in Gooty tāluka, Anantapur district.
v2.c18.s1.t1.30
³ 586 of 1912; Rangachari, Top. List. I, Ap. 44, p. 7.
v2.c18.s1.t1.31
⁴ 97 of 1912; Rangachari, ibid., I, Ap. 94, p. 16.
v2.c18.s1.t1.32
⁵ 395 of 1920.
v2.c18.s1.t1.33
While these epigraphs show that the Vipravinōdins exercised some influence in the sixteenth century, evidence is not forthcoming to prove that they asserted their rights and strove to secure the rank and privileges of Brahmans. Perhaps future research may enlighten us on this point, and enable us to know that the Vipravinōdins, like the Kammāḷas, the Kaikkōḷars, and the Dēvaṅgas,⁶ perturbed the social atmosphere of the times. There is nothing improbable in the Vipravinōdins struggling against the pretensions of the Brahmans, if it is true that they originally belonged to the priestly class. Moreover, even among Śūdras there seems to have been a similar movement to rise higher in the social scale. This is inferred from a Tamil copper-plate which speaks of a Śūdra priest consecrating a king in the presence of a Vijayanagara official. The record dated Śaka 1518, cyclic year Hēviḷambi (A.D. 1596) states that, in the reign of the Emperor Veṅkaṭapati Dēva, a Śūdra priest joined with a large number of other Śūdras and made one Kaṇḍiya Dēvar king of Vṛiddhāchalam, in the presence of Muttu Kṛishṇappa Nāyaka.¹
v2.c18.s1.t1.34
⁶ Srinivasa Aiyangar, Tamil Studies, p. 109.
v2.c18.s1.t1.35
¹ Sewell, *Lists*, II, C. P. No. 75, p. 9. Sewell considered Muttu Kṛishṇappa Nāyaka to be the ruler of Madura. But Rangachari identifies him with Muttu Kṛishṇappa, son of Vaiyappa Kṛishṇappa Koṇḍama Nāyaka. *Top. List.*, I, S.A. 144 and 199, pp. 146, 154-5. The question whether the Śūdras are qualified for the knowledge of Brahmans is discussed by Rāmānuja. *Vēdānta Sūtras*, with the *Commentary* of Rāmānuja, Adhyaya, 1, Pada 3, 32, pp. 336-7. (S.B.E. Vol. 48).
v2.c18.s1.t1.36
A fourth feature which was inevitable in an age which had great material prosperity was that related to the difference between rich and poor people. We can only assume that such disparity between the wealthier and humbler classes which existed in Bedar must also have been noticeable in Vijayanagara. Nikitin gives us an account of the state of affairs in Bedar. "The land is overstocked with people; but those in the country are very miserable, while the nobles are extremely opulent and delight in luxury. They are wont to be carried in their silver-beds, preceded by some twenty chargers caparisoned in gold, and followed by 300 men on horseback and 500 on foot, and by horn-men, ten torch bearers and ten musicians" ². But, as we said in connection with the observations of Nuniz on the revenue administration of Vijayanagara, we have to take into consideration here the prosperous condition of the people as described by Paes and Barbosa, and the evidence of numerous records testifying to the generosity of the citizens who gave grants for charitable and religious purposes.³
v2.c18.s1.t1.37
² Major, *India*, p. 14; Sewell, *For. Emp.*, p. 104.
v2.c18.s1.t1.38
³ Supra Chapter I, Section 2.
v2.c18.s1.t1.39
Finally, we may note one more peculiarity of the times. It was the impetus which the social differences gave to an institution which existed long before the advent of the sons of Saṅgama. And this was the division of the society into two main classes called the Right Hand and Left Hand sections.
Cites (2)
- Brahmasūtra — Bādarāyaṇa, Sanskrit
- Śukranīti (Śukrācārya) — Śukrācārya, Sanskrit