The Colas c28.8

c28.8

Some curious instances of mixed castes and their duties are recorded in the inscriptions; these show that the theories of mixed castes, *anulōma* and *pratilōma*, were not the purely fanciful concepts of law-givers that we generally take them to be; either they had some basis in the facts of social life, or what is perhaps more likely, particular sections of the population began to pin their faith to particular sections of what was originally a mythical scheme. At any rate it is difficult to believe that the scheme of the four original *varṇas* ever conformed to the facts of South Indian social life; even less credible are the theories of particular castes arising from mixed unions of particular types. Towards the close of the reign of Kulōttunga I, the *bhaṭṭas* of Rājāśraya-caturvēdimangalam consulted the *śāstras* and laid down the professions to be followed by the *anulōma* caste of Rathakāras, viz. architecture, coach- and chariot-building, the erection of *gōpuras* with icons on them and of *maṇḍapas*, the manufacture of sacrificial instruments and so on.¹⁰ It is to be noted that the decision here recorded is in close conformity with the views of Vijñānēśvara, the contemporary jurist and author of the *Mitākṣarā*, the celebrated commentary on the *Yājñavalkyasmṛti*. From an inscription dated 1169, the class of Rathakāras is seen to have included blacksmiths, goldsmiths and stone masons, besides carpenters.¹¹ Two inscriptions of the reign of Vikramacōḷa give accounts of a class of *utkṛṣṭa-āyōgavas* or *paṭṭinavans* which do not seem to fit in so easily with the extant legal texts, at any rate, not with the *Mitākṣarā*. The two inscriptions differ from each other and from Yājñavalkya with regard to the origin of this class; the *smṛti* makes them children of Vaiśya women and Śūdra men; one of the inscriptions calls them children of Brahma-Vaiśya, perhaps Brahmins following Vaiśya occupations,¹² while the second inscription quotes a Sanskrit verse which says that an *āyogava* is born of the union of a Kṣatriya woman with a Vaiśya;¹³ on the whole they seem to have been accepted as a *pratilōma* caste. Their profession was weaving, and it was their privilege to supply fresh cloth for *upanayana* and other domestic ceremonies, for *dhvaja-paṭas* to the temples during festivals and generally to supply all things made of yarn and required by gods, Brahmins, and kings. In 1127, some families of this caste accepted some *iraiyili* land at Tribhuvani and in return undertook to supply cloths to the local temple on specified occasions and in stated quantities; they authorised the Śrī Vaiṣṇavas of the temple to surround (their dwellings), to imprison them, and take all steps necessary to force them to keep the engagement if they were in default.¹⁴ In the very next year, 1128, twenty families of this class migrated from five different villages to Tirukkaṇṇapuram to settle there and accept service in the *brahmadēya* village and its temple; the terms of their settlement being placed under the protection of *mahāsabhai ēlaimbadinmar*, the *Mahāsabhā* 350, and Śrī Vaiṣṇavas of the eighteen *nāḍus*.¹⁵