[Pramāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/) › [Studies](https://indike.org/pramana/ins) › [General history and culture](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general) › [History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.)](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921) › v3.c41 # History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c41: Book VIII. History of Mediaeval Hindu India (being a History of India from 600 to 1200 A.D.) v3.c41 - **Language:** English ## Contents - [v3.c41.s1 Brahmins.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1) — 13 parts - [v3.c41.s2 The Rajputs.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2) — 25 parts - [v3.c41.s3 Śudras.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s3) — 1 part - [v3.c41.s4 Untouchables.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s4) — 21 parts - [v3.c41.s5 Mahomedanism](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s5) — 3 parts - [v3.c41.s6 Jainism.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s6) — 25 parts - [v3.c41.s7 New Vaishnavism.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s7) — 8 parts - [v3.c41.s8 New or Vīra Śaivism.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s8) — 23 parts - [v3.c41.s9 Note 1—Different Views on Moksha or Absolution.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s9) — 6 parts - [v3.c41.s10 The Vedas.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s10) — 3 parts - [v3.c41.s11 Vedic Sacrifices.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s11) — 1 part - [v3.c41.s12 Occasional Sacrifices.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s12) — 2 parts - [v3.c41.s13 Idol-Worship.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s13) — 9 parts - [v3.c41.s14 Mathas.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s14) — 1 part - [v3.c41.s15 Āgamas and Tantras.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s15) — 2 parts - [v3.c41.s16 Multiplication of Ceremonies or Ritual](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s16) — 4 parts - [v3.c41.s17 Extension of Purāṇa Literature.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s17) — 1 part - [v3.c41.s18 Rise of Minor Smritis and Purāṇas.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s18) — 2 parts - [v3.c41.s19 The Kalivarjas.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s19) — 5 parts - [v3.c41.s20 Fast Days.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s20) — 2 parts - [v3.c41.s21 Festivals.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s21) — 12 parts - [v3.c41.s22 Note—Shivaji's Ashtapradhāna.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s22) — 23 parts - [v3.c41.s23 Judicial.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s23) — 6 parts - [v3.c41.s24 Popular Assemblies in South India.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s24) — 5 parts - [v3.c41.s25 Military.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s25) — 4 parts - [v3.c41.s26 Source of Honour.](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s26) — 9 parts ### Book VIII. ### [v3.c41.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.1) RAMIFICATION OF CASTE. ### [v3.c41.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.2) As stated in the beginning of this volume, we have a very valuable guide for ascertaining the social condition of Hindu India at the outset of this sub-period, in Al-Beruni who wrote his book on India in 1030 A. D. Al-Beruni lived among the Hindus at Multan and elsewhere in the Panjab and was an accurate observer. But unfortunately he sometimes mixes what he read in Hindu religious books which he studied in the original, with what he saw and his observations, therefore, are not always as reliable as those of previous Arab writers quoted in our second volume. However, we begin the description of the social condition of India in this sub-period, with quoting what Al-Beruni says on subject of caste in his book on India. Fortunately he was acquainted with Persian and Greek history and gives us facts from the west for comparison with Indian condition. ### [v3.c41.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.3) Al-Beruni shows that caste had developed in ancient times among the Persians, not to speak of the Greeks and Romans. "The ancient Chosroes had created great institutions of this kind (caste) which could not be broken through by the special merits of any individual nor by bribery. When Ardashir restored the Persian empire, he also restored the classes or castes in the following manner:— ### [v3.c41.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.4) 1. Knights and princes. 2. Monks, fire-priests and lawyers. 3. Physicians and astronomers and other men of science. 4. Husbandmen and artisans. ### [v3.c41.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.5) "And within these classes there were subdivisions distinct from each other, like the species within a genus. The Hindus have also institutions of this kind. We, Moslems, consider all men equal except in piety and this is an obstacle which prevents understanding between us and the Hindus. ### [v3.c41.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.6) "The Hindus call their castes, varnas or colours and from the genealogical point of view they call them Jatah (Jati). They are four from the beginning. The highest are the Brahmins; next come Kshatriyas. Their degree is not much below that of the Brahmins. Then follow the Vaiśyas and the Śudras. Between the two latter classes there is no very great distance. Much as these differ, they live together in the same towns and villages, mixed together in the same houses and lodgings" (Sachau I pp. 99-101). ### [v3.c41.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.7) This long extract will show to us that this description of Hindu castes is not as accurate as that given in Volume II from previous Arab writers. The splitting of Kshatriyas into ruling Kshatriyas and cultivating Kshatriyas spoken of by Ibn Khordadba (Vol. II p. 179) is not even mentioned here. Probably in 1040 A. D. Rajputs had been so decimated and perhaps had fallen so low that they did not impress Al-Beruni separately. The statement in the Gāhadavāla inscription quoted before (p. 221) seems thus to be true of the condition of things at this time, that the Kshatriya ruling clans had almost been destroyed at least in the Panjab and U. P. and the recitation of the Veda had almost stopped when Chandra Gāhadavāla rehabilitated both. Secondly, Al-Beruni speaks somewhat from the books and not from actual observation and further says nothing about marriage. Ibn Khordadba stated that the Brahmins and Rajputs married from the lower caste of Kshatriyas and we have the historical mention of Rājaśekhara marrying a Chauhan lady. Probably in Al-Beruni's time (or later when castes were consolidated) such marriages had altogether stopped. Thirdly, Al-Beruni does not speak of intermediate castes which must have been many, nor of any subdivisions of the principal castes which probably had not yet arisen. ### [v3.c41.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.8) The castes among the Persians who were all Aryans were naturally different from those among the Hindus who were formed by a combination of Aryan and non-Aryan populations; ### [v3.c41.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.9) and hence the class of Śūdras did not exist among the Persians. Moreover we do not know if caste distinctions among the Persians were not matrimonial, but were purely occupational. Among the Hindus, Pratiloma marriage was stopped in pre-Buddhist days and Anuloma marriage ceased probably at this time. Lastly, Al-Beruni says that all castes lived mixed together in the same houses and lodgings. This is probably a correct observation so far as the Panjab is concerned; for there was not much difference of food or habits between the different classes, all being flesh-eaters. In the rest of the country, this could not have been so; even if it were so in 1040 A. D. things changed so completely during the next two centuries owing to the recrudescence of the doctrine of Ahimsā that many castes gave up animal food and vegetarians and non-vegetarians could not have lived together in the same houses. Hence, after Al-Beruni, caste developed in exclusiveness to such an extent that the original four castes of India gave place in this sub-period to hundreds and thousands of sub-castes as we proceed to show. ### [v3.c41.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.10) We stated in our first volume that Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaiśyas formed undivided castes during the first sub-period (600-800). They remained so during the second sub-period also (800-1000 A. D.). But during the third sub-period, each of these castes became split into hundreds of sub-castes as inscriptions prove. The reasons were apparently, as shown above, 1st, a difference of food; 2nd, ideas of racial purity and 3rd, different social customs prevailing in different countries. We will take each of these castes separately and show how it became subdivided in this sub-period. ### Brahmins. ### [v3.c41.s1.1.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.1.1) In the beginning of this sub-period Brahmins all over India were one caste undoubtedly. In previous centuries Brahmins were distinguished by their gotras and their Śākhās only. Inscriptions of all countries, in previous sub-periods give only their gotras and Śākhās (or Vedic ritual) and never mention the names of any sub-section. Even in this sub-period for about fifty years we find the same practice prevailing. Thus a Chandella grant dated 1050 A. D. (I. A. XVI p. 206) describes the donee as a Bhāradvāja gotra, Tripravara Brahmin of Yajurveda Śākhā. In a Kalachuri inscription again (Kahla, Gorakhpur District U. P.) dated 1077 A. D. (E. I. VII p. 86), we have many Brahmin donees whose description consists of their gotras with pravara number of each and their Śākhās plus their place (village or town) of residence. So also a later Chālukya grant dated 1040 describes the donee as Kauśika gotra and Bahvṛcha (Rigvedi) Brahmin (B. B. R. A. S. XII p. 51). Later we begin to have the mention of the Brahmins' country of residence. Thus Kumārapāla's Praśasti at Vadnagar mentions the writer as a Nāgara Brahmin (St. 1208, 1151 A. D.). Some Chandella and Gāhadavāla inscriptions describe the Brahmin donees as Thakkura (E. I. IV p. 121) and in Gāhadavāla and Haihaya inscriptions they are described as Rāuta (E. I. XIV. p. 274). In a feudatory southern Malwa inscription dated 1135 A. D. we find the Brahmin donee described as Karṇāta (I. A. ### [v3.c41.s1.1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.1.2) XIV) with the Brahmin's gotra and Pravara added and it was an important discovery to find a Śilāhāra of Karhad grant describing the Brahmin donees as Karhāṭaka and Ghaisāsa Brahmins, the importance of which we will shortly notice. Names of country became so important that latterly the mention of gotra and Śākhā was omitted for Brahmins, though in the previous sub-period it was considered necessary (Vol. II p. 276). Thus in the Sāsabahu temple inscription (I. A. XV p. 36) dated 1093 we find names of many Brahmin donees without the mention of gotra. In an inscription of Bholā Bhīma of Gujarat dated St. 1256 or 1200 A.D. (I. A. XI p.72) the Brahmin donee is described without the mention of his gotra or Śākhā by his name only and by his Raikavāla Jāti or sub-section of Brahmin caste. In a Konkan inscription dated 1249 A. D. (J. R. A. S. Bombay IX p. 248) we have names of 32 Brahmin donees whose gotras are given but whose Śākhā is not stated and instead of it every Brahmin's surname is given. Surnames grew by this time, either from profession or from place of residence or other peculiarities and the importance of Śākhā was lost sight of. Surnames probably came into use among Brahmins in this sub-period such as Dikshita, Raut, Thakur, Pāthaka, Upādhyāya, Pattavardhana\* and so on. It is no doubt true that even so late as 1200 A. D. we find gotra and pravara of Brahmins mentioned; ### [v3.c41.s1.1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.1.3) the continuance of their mention is not strange as Brahmins still keep up the memory of their gotra and pravara. But what is pertinent to remark is that along with gotras, family surnames begin to be mentioned and later on subcaste names based on country of residence. Thus in a Paramāra inscription dated 1226 A. D. (E. I. IX pp. 108 and 121) we have many names of Brahmin donees with gotra and pravara mentioned but in each case the surname is added, such as Pandit, Dīkshita, Dvivedi, Chaturvedi, Āvasthika and so on, and the places from which these Brahmins of the same surname came are different such as Mathura, Tripur, Akola, Dendavāna. So also in an inscription of Jayachchandra dated 1177 (E. I. IV p. 129) the many Brahmin donees are thus described, 1 Deva Śri Lotārka (gotra not given), 2 Bandhula gotra Purohita Śri Paharajaya, 3 Sarkarākshya gotra Pandit Śri Rishikeya and so on; the word Pandit is abbreviated into Pam for four Brahmins and one is styled Dviveda. These epithets gradually grew into surnames of these Brahmins. In I. A. XIX (p. 353) we have the donee Brahmin described as Dākshiṇātya Karṇāta Diveda Thakkura as also Āvasthika. The surname Avasthi has survived in Oudh among Brahmins but not among Deccani or Karṇāṭaka Brahmins. The gotra thus retains for some time its importance among Brahmins at least and finds mention in inscriptions almost invariably. ### [v3.c41.s1.1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.1.4) But as stated above, Pravara and Śākhā are usually omitted though all Brahmins have retained their memory down to this day. ### [v3.c41.s1.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.2) ∗ The name Trivādi occurring in this inscription is inexplicable as also Kramita. ### [v3.c41.s1.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.3) Whatever this may be, we have not mention yet of the division of Brahmins into the modern two main sections viz. Pancha Gauda and Pancha Drāvida. It is not found even in the Skanda Purāṇa which we have placed in the ninth century A. D. (see Vol. II p. 39 ) properly enough. For the distinction arose even later than 1200 A. D. This main division is probably based on the flesh food of the former and the vegetarianism of the latter. But there is no doubt that Brahmins had sub-divided themselves into numerous sub-sections long before 1200 A. D., according to country of residence or its chief town, owing to peculiarities of customs, as also of ideas of purity of race. We find it recorded in the Nāgara Khanda of the Skanda Purāṇa where the whole history of Nāgara Brahmins and their special good Hāṭakeśvara Śiva is given that an unknown Brahmin came to their town and a Nāgara Brahmin gave him his daughter in marriage. He was subsequently found out to be a Cāṇḍāla to the consternation of the community and the Nāgaras thereupon made it a rule not to give daughters in marriage to any but known Nāgara Brahmins and the Nāgara known Brahmin families were enumerated. This arrangement seems gradually to have been adopted by all castes and sub-castes came consequently to deserve the name jñāti or known section. In the Abu inscription we have the word Nāgara jñātibhājā (Vol. II p 85) actually used by the writer to describe his caste or subsection (St. 1331 or 1274 A. D.). This story is apparently a later invention and probably an interpolation in the Skanda Purāṇa but it indicates the reason why marriage relations were gradually restricted to people of known pedigree residing in the same country. And thus began the subdivisions of Brahmins based on country of residence. Commencing from Kashmir we have thus Brahmins divided into 1. Kashmiri. 2. Nagarkotia (those who reside in Nagarkot the capital of Katoch kings in Kangra). 3. Muhyal in the Panjab (al is a termination which indicates subcaste). 4. Sārasvata. 5. Gauda (of Guda or Thanesar). 6. Narnol. 7. Kanojia and 8. Sarjupāria or residing beyond the Śarayu. 9. Jajhotia. 10. Tiwari. 11. Srimāli and 12. Pushkarnā or residing at Pushkar in Rājputana. 13. Sindhi. 14. Nāgara (of Ānandpura). 15. Dasor (of Daśapura). 16. Modha (of country formerly named Dharmāraṇya). 17. Gujarāti. 18. Malvi. 19. Bengali. 20. Ooriya. 21. Deshastha. 22. Konkanastha or Chitpāwan (belonging to Chittapolana a town in Ratnagiri District). 23. Karhade (living under the Śilaharas of Karhad). 24. Karṇāṭa. 25. Andhra or Telugu. 26. Tamil and 27. Malyali or Nambudri. These are the main subsections of Brahmins recognisable as named after country of residence; but there are many subdivisions of these again based on various other grounds such as Daśas and Viśas in the north and Aiyars and Ayyangars in the south. For Brahmins divided further from their acceptance of this or that philosophy. The Ayyars are Smārtas i. e. those who look upon Śiva and Viṣṇu as equal, while Ayyangars believe Nārāyaṇa to be the highest god and follow the philosophy of Rāmānuja. ### [v3.c41.s1.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.4) Later still the followers of Madhva and his Dvaita philosophy became a separate sub-section of Brahmins and were called Āchāryas. These gave up not only intermarriage but in many cases interdining also; though we have no direct mention of these restrictions in the Dharmaśāstras. ### [v3.c41.s1.5.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.5.1) Strangely enough the northern Brahmins were looked upon in the beginning of this sub-period as purer in race as also in Āchāra or religious life and we have evidence, traditional no doubt, of many southern kings inviting northern India Brahmin families to settle in their countries. Thus we find the Sena king Sāmanta or Ballāla inviting Kanaujia Brahmins to settle in Bengal though tradition speaks of these Brahmins as having come in the time of Ādiśūra, a fictitious king of earlier date; and we have mention of Brahmins coming from the north and settling in Orissa also in the days of the Kesari kings. We have mention again of Northern Brahmins being invited to settle in Gujarat by Mūlarāja and even so far south as the Tamil land we have mention of a Chola king inviting and settling in his country Brahmins from Northern India. In all these cases, these Brahmins formed separate sub-castes owing to their unwillingness to mix with local Brahmins, considered to be of lower purity, either in food or marriage. The Nagarakotia Brahmins alone who believe that they were invited by a Katoch king say that they consist of 13 families, 3 of whom were Kashmiri, 3 Kanaujia and 3 Sārasvata, the remaining four being local Brahmins. (These probably were not agriculturalists). The number of sub-castes was thus further increased. Then again we may believe that certain sections of Brahmins migrated to safer lands from the Panjab and the U. P. ### [v3.c41.s1.5.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.5.2) owing to invasions first and then oppression of Mahomedan conquerors. The Gauda Sārasvata Brahmins of Goa territory thus appear to have come from the region of the Sarasvati about this time. It is an unhistorical idea that they came from Bengal, for Guda is a name which originally was applied to the country round Thanesar and the peculiarity of these Brahmins viz. that they eat fish is mentioned even in the Mahābhārata as arising among Brahmins residing on the banks of the Sarasvati during a long famine. The Bengali Brahmins were emigrants from the same ancient country of the Sārasvatas and are also hence called Gauda. We disbelieve the tradition of the Gauda Sārasvatas of Goa coming from Bengal because there is no historical reason why they should have left Bengal and further because their speech does not exhibit any linguistic and phonetic peculiarities of Bengal such as the change of s into sh and a into ō. The Chitpāvans are another section of Konkan Brahmins which has the tradition of coming there from outside. As stated in our Mahābhārata Mīmānsā they from their fair complexion appear to have come from the Panjab hilly districts into the hilly region of the Ratnagiri District after a short halt in the Thana District about Bassein where is the original first Konkan sanctuary of Paraśurāma. These instances will suffice to show that in this sub-period we have evidence of Brahmin families migrating to, or being invited to settle in, southern and eastern countries. ### [v3.c41.s1.5.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.5.3) The example again of Deccani Brahmins going to the Āndhra country in the wake of Chālukya conquest of Vengi and forming a separate sub-section of Brahmins called now Niyogi shows that there may be instances of Brahmin migrations after conquest, as happened in modern history after the conquests of the Marathas. The mode adopted by Nāgara Brahmins of defining their sub-caste by counting their families and their gotras was followed by all these various sub-sections and hence have arisen those hundreds of sub-castes into which Brahmins are now sub-divided and which restrict marriage and food to themselves. All these sub-sections acquired new names from country or town of their residence or from other causes, which became of paramount importance owing to restriction of marriage to each sub-section and gotra and Śākhā became consequently of minor importance. But it must be stated that all the sub-sections of Brahmins appear to have adhered loyally to their ancient Vedic religion. They not only preserved their Veda or Śākhā but also its special ritual and also the memory of their gotras and pravaras and still preserve the gotra and pravara law of marriage prohibition enjoined by the smritis, the gotras and pravaras being enumerated in the Śrauta Sūtras. And hence it is that gotra and pravara among Brahmins and even Kshatriyas remain the same throughout the whole of India though Brahmin and Kshatriya families everywhere acquired new names from curious causes. ### [v3.c41.s1.5.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.5.4) These names became no doubt predominant, but they never acquired so great an importance among Brahmins at least as to destroy the importance of gotra, and the gotra law of marriage is still the supreme law of marriage among Brahmins. ### [v3.c41.s1.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.6) Many of these subcastes of Brahmins especially in Northern India were then non-vegetarian and they continue so down to this day. Al-Beruni describing the food of Hindus says "Christians are not allowed to kill, so also the Brahmins." The rules given hereafter apply to Brahmins (as Christian rules apply to bishops and monks), but not others. First, strangulation of certain animals only is allowed viz. sheep, goat, gazelle, rhinoceros (genda), water and land birds such as peacock etc.; Second, forbidden animals are ox, camel, horse, elephant &c., tame poultry, fish and all kinds of eggs. ### [v3.c41.s1.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.7) NOTE:—MARCO POLO ON LAD BRAHMINS. ### [v3.c41.s1.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.8) The description given by Marco Polo of Brahmins of the country called Lar by him deserves to be quoted and discussed here. Marco Polo travelled in India about 1280 A. D. roughly and wrote about 1300 A. D. Though this account is thus a hundred years later than our period, it cannot be considered inapplicable, as the condition then of the country must have been the same as in 1200, Mahomedan conquest coming later. Speaking of the province of Lar, he says (Marco Polo by Miss Yule Vol. II p. 360) "All Brahmins come from that country on the west. They are best merchants and most truthful. They eat no flesh and drink no wine and lead a life of chastity. They wear a thread of cotton on their shoulders which crosses the breast and the back. They have a rich and powerful king who sends Brahmins to purchase best diamonds in Soli (Chola) and best pearls. They believe in bad and auspicious hours for every week day and transact business only at auspicious times. They are long-lived as they are very abstemious and they have capital teeth owing to a certain herb they chew." ### [v3.c41.s1.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.9) "There are other brahmins called Chugi (Jogi) who are longer-lived, who are devoted to the idols. They live upto 150 or even 200 years. They eat rice and milk only. They drink a potion of sulphur and quicksilver twice a day which leads to longevity. Some of them are ascetics who go about stark naked. They have a small ox of pewter or gold tied over their forehead. They daub themselves with cowdung ashes. If any one does them good, they put the ashes in the middle of his forehead. They eat from dry leaves of the apple of paradise (plantain?). They would not kill any animal even a fly or a flea. They fast many days and drink nothing but water. They sleep on the ground and yet they live long. They burn their dead." ### [v3.c41.s1.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.10) Miss Yule observes on this in a note that "Lardeśa included southern Gujarat, Thana and Chaul. Konkani Brahmins adopted trade only when they were expelled from Goa. This high praise of the truthfulness of Brahmins was just and as old as the Greeks. It is not only given by Greek writers but by Hiuen Tsang and also by Arab travellers." ### [v3.c41.s1.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.11) It is somewhat difficult to determine to whom the above description applies. Lar no doubt according to Arab travellers included Thana and Kolaba districts and had a language of its own called Lari. But Marco Polo later describes the kingdom of Thana separately. We have seen that Śilāhāra kings ruled in Thana. Lardeśa was again distinct from Gujarat which is also separately described by Marco Polo and which with its capital Patan was ruled by Vaghela kings in about 1300 A. D. The language of this part is described again as distinct and peculiar (p. 392). Thus upto 1300 A. D. modern southern Gujarat or Lardeśa was distinct from Northern Gujarat politically as well as in language. The people apparently had a king of their own, though in previous centuries, they were under the Rāshtrakūṭas and later under Western Chālukyas of Kalyan. The Brahmins of Lardeśa are not now, however, known as a separate sub-caste. But probably they were a distinct sub-caste then and went for trade to such distant countries as the countries of Chola and Pāndya which produced diamonds and pearls. The Konkan Brahmins are not much known as traders though their truthfulness as of other Brahmins must have been anciently well known. The surnames Pattavardhana, Ghalisa and Ghaisāsa now found among Konkan and Karhada Brahmins only and mentioned in a Goa Kadamba inscription dated Śaka 1171 or 1249 A. D. (J. R. A. S. Bombay IX p. 243) indicate that these families were traders; what trade these surnames indicated, we are not able to determine. The four Brahmins mentioned in an inscription dated 1190 A. D., of Bhoja II Śilāhāra king of Karhād are named: 1. Adityabhatta 2. Lakshmidharabhatta 3. Karhātaka Prabhākara Ghaisāsa and 4 Vāsiyana Ghaisāsa (gotra nowhere mentioned). The word Karhātaka here plainly indicates a subcaste and Ghaisāsa plainly imports a profession which is not religious. But certainly these did not trade in diamonds and pearls as Marco Polo states. We must, therefore, believe that Lad Brahmins were a distinct sub-caste spread over the whole of southern India who traded in diamonds and pearls and who were known then for their great veracity. It appears that Marco Polo met them in the Pāndya country as he describes Lar Deśa just almost immediately after the Pāndya country. The country named by him as Maabar is certainly the Pāndya country which produced pearls. Of this country he says rightly that "there are no tailors here. All people, men and women, rich and poor, including even the king go about naked with a strip of cloth round their loins. Even the soldiers go to fight naked, with lance and shield," He describes the naked king as distinguished only by the fineness of the loin cloth and the necklace of precious stones, a description which reminds one of that by Kalidāsa in Raghu (पाण्ड्ययमंसर्पितलम्बहारः). The Brahmins of Dravida even now move about almost naked. Marco Polo next describes the kingdom of Mutfili, an inexplicable name; but it is certainly the Andhra kingdom of Warangal as it is described as ruled then by a queen (daughter of Pratāparudra) and as diamonds are said to be found in its mountains, referring probably to the mines of Golkonda. It is in these countries apparently that Marco Polo came across the Brahmins of the Lar country which is described next as lying in the west and which must mean the country of Lāta or modern southern Gujarat. ### [v3.c41.s1.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.12) The ascetics described seem to be Śaiva ascetics but those with a metal ox on their foreheads can not be Jangamas as they do not burn their dead but bury them. The Vīraśaiva schism (Lingāyat) had no doubt arisen already. But the Lingāyats had probably not yet gone to Konkan or Lāta where even now they are scarcely to be found. These ascetics, therefore, do not now survive as even Miss Yule thinks. ### [v3.c41.s1.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s1.13) They again cannot be Jains, though their abstention from all animal slaughter, their injuring not even a fly or a flea and their long fasts may suggest their being Jains. But Jains do not use cowdung ashes nor apply them to the forehead of their disciples. They, therefore, must be Śaiva ascetics of an order which is not now in existence. They perhaps were followers of Lakulīśa whose chief sacred place is near Broach, as already stated. The whole description, therefore, according to our view, does not apply to Konkan Brahmins though it is suggestive of them and applies to Lad Brahmins who are now found, not in South Gujarat, but all over the Deccan including Hyderabad territory and Berar. They are still a mercantile community but are very religious orthodox Brahmins. ### The Rajputs. ### [v3.c41.s2.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.1) Going on to consider the next chief caste of the Kshatriyas, we find that it also subdivided during this sub-period though not into numerous sub-sects. It could not, for obvious reasons, subdivide on the basis of town or country of residence. It had already divided itself into two main sections viz. those who cultivated and those who did not. The former were naturally considered lower in grade and the latter who were rulers of kingdoms, at least heads of villages or districts, were considered to be higher in grade. These latter were now called by distinction Rajputs a word used in inscriptions of this period to denote the ruling Kshatriyas generally (e.g. E. I. XIV p. 159 Ballālasena insc. जहिर राजपुत्राः). They were first looked upon as even higher than Brahmins, as shown in Vol. II (p. 178). This higher status of the Rajputs described by Arab travellers of the preceding century is not mentioned by Al-Beruni who, as often stated before, speaks more from Hindu law books than from actual observation. Or it may be that during the period of Mahomedan invasions many of the Panjab Rajput ruling families were destroyed; and when the Gāhadavāla king Chandra drove the Mahomedan oppressors out of northern India and reconstituted the Kshatriya caste, it naturally assumed its position as defined in the Hindu Śāstras, viz. next to that of the Brahmins. Yet they were considered equal to the Brahmins in all respects as Al-Beruni himself admits that their degree is not much below that of the Brahmins. Thus they were allowed to study the Vedas and did study Veda and Śāstra and we have already seen how noted kings such as Bhoja and Govindachandra were as learned in the sacred and profane lore as the most learned Brahmins. ### [v3.c41.s2.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.2) In the usual manner, the Rajput or ruling families of India constituted themselves into a sub-section about 1100 A. D. by the enumeration of the orthodox pure Kshatriya ruling families of the time. In this enumeration Panjab remained naturally excluded, being then entirely under Mahomedan rule; and there indeed were no ruling Kshatriya families then in the Panjab. The Himalayan ruling families also did not come in the enumeration for another reason which we will notice later on. The South Indian ruling families were also excluded as they were apparently not considered of pure Aryan race and of Kshatriya descent. The Kshatriya families ruling in Mahārāshtra were, however, included as they had continuous marriage relations with the ruling Kshatriya families of Northern India. The number of these Rajput families was found to be 36 and this number soon became traditional, as we find it mentioned in the Rājatarangiṇī of Kalhaṇa of 1159 A. D. Which were these 36 families in the beginning it is difficult to determine, as no unquestionable list of that date has come down to us. We have treated the list in the Rāsā as contemporaneous with Prithvīrāj though the Rāsā in its present form is undoubtedly to be placed in the 16th century A. D. (vide Vol. II p. 70) and we will examine in a note how that list represents the correct political condition of the country about 1100 A.D. It may be noted that by this enumeration the surnames or family names of the several clans further acquired importance and the gotra of each family, although each had its separate gotra, gradually became of no value even in matters of marriage. Indeed inscriptions of this period often look upon the clan name as gotra itself e. g. Guhila gotra, Pratihāra gotra etc. (See also Vol. II p. 177). ### [v3.c41.s2.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.3) In the Rāsā list firstly the Senas of Lakhnauti are conspicuous by their absence and this supports the view that their power in Bengal was established later than 1100 A. D. Next we note that all ruling families of South India viz. Gangas, Cholas, Pāndyas and Keralas are also not in the list. The only explanation seems, as stated above, to be that their claim to pure Kshatriya origin was not admitted as they had no marriage relations with the Kshatriyas of Northern India. The ruling Kshatriya families of Mahārāshtra occupying an intermediate position geographically, naturally came to occupy an intermediate position racially. We have already said that the Śilāhāras are the only truly Maratha family which finds a mention in the list of the 36 royal clans (p. 247). As to the Chālukyas and the Rāshtrakūtas of the Deccan, though they are, according to our view, distinct from the families of the same name of Northern India, their inclusion in the 36 under the same names can not be denied. But it is remarkable that the Kadambas of Goa are not mentioned among the thirty-śix. We have uncontested evidence that two princesses from this family were married into the Gujarat Chālukya family during this sub-period.\* Probably the Rajputs of Northern India gradually confined their sub-caste to Northern India and refused to continue marriage relations with Kshatriya families of Mahārāshtra,† as these families had marriage relations with Non-Aryan ruling families of South India also. The Maratha Kshatriyas, consequently, after this period, including the Śilāhāras, became a separate group or sub-caste and they too had their own enumeration of 96 Maratha families to which marriage was thenceforth confined. ### [v3.c41.s2.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.4) ∗ The Kumārapāla Charita mentions such a marriage in the verse कर्णोपि कर्णटृपाङ्ग-जायाकार पाणिग्रहणं जयायाः ।; it also mentions Karna's marriage with a Kashmir princess कणय काश्मीरपतिः स्वपुत्रीं प्रेषिदथो मैणळदेविनाम्नीम् ॥ ### [v3.c41.s2.5](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.5) † Karna Vaghela declined for example to give his daughter to the Yadava king of Deogiri about 1300 A. D. ### [v3.c41.s2.6](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.6) The Rajputs from Western Himalayas formed a third group which became a distinct sub-section, not only on account of its isolation but also of certain marriage customs peculiar to them. In the Himalayas then survived and still survive marriage customs of ancient India by which the higher castes could take wives from lower castes, the caste of the progeny being unaffected viz. that of the father. We find thus, even now, three grades of Kshatriyas in the Himalayan region adjacent to the Panjab viz. Rajputs, Rāṇas or Thakurs and Rāthis. The Rajputs take girls from the Thakurs and these from the Rāthis but do not give them their girls. The Rajputs of the Himalayan region, however, though they have old mixed marriage customs still prevalent among them, are pure in race as the Rāthis are not Mongolians but Aryans, are in fact Kshatriyas lower in grade only because they follow agriculture. They further allow Karewa or widow remarriage which is prohibited to the Rajputs as to Brahmins and Vaiśyas. Full information is given in "Castes and Tribes of the Panjab" relating to minor sub-divisions of the Rajputs of the Himalayan region amongst whom the Katoch are the leading family with the Maharaja of Lambagram at their head. But the names of the several Sūryavaṅśi and Chandravaṅśi families of the highest,\* middling and lowest grades with names based chiefly on place of residence such as Jammuwāl, Guleria, etc. it is not necessary to give here in detail. ### [v3.c41.s2.7](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.7) In the Panjab itself the Kshatriyas of the western parts were mostly forcibly converted to Mahomedanism in the days of Mahmud and of Shihabuddin and these do not now use or even like the name Rajput, though they still preserve old Kshatriya clan names of Mahābhārata or Greek days such as Yaudheyas (Johiyas), Anavas (Janjuas) etc. and still observe certain Hindu customs such as calling a Brahmin at the birth of a child or at marriage. In the eastern parts, Rajputs are still found but they are immigrants from lands further east and south in Mahomedan times, as they use the orthodox clan names from the list of the 36 royal clans such as Paramāra, Chauhan, Tuar, Rathod, Kachhwāhe, &c.; and these have still marriage relations with the Rajputs of Delhi and Rajputana. The Panjab and the land of the Sarasvatī as also Pānchāla was the ancient land of Brahmins and Kshatriyas and all Brahmins and Kshatriyas in the east and south of India came originally from this region. It, therefore, follows that Paramāras and Chauhans, Rathods and Kachhwāhas are clan-names which originally must have come from the Panjab itself in ancient times. Or these names which do not find a mention in the Mahābhārata may have come into existence in the south and the east, in the middle land and in Rajputana, in the sixth century or later, among Kshatriya clans driven out of or leaving the Panjab under stress of Kushan and Hūṇa invasions. Certain it is that most of the names of clans in the list of 36 are not found in the Mahābhārata; and as they are found in the eastern parts of the Panjab at the present day, these Rajputs must have gone from the south. Local tradition also supports this inference as the Rajputs of Eastern Panjab believe that they came there from the Delhi region and from Rajputana in Mahomedan times. These Rajputs, therefore, cannot be treated as a separate group and must be included in the Rajputana group. ### [v3.c41.s2.8](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.8) ∗ The Miyans are the highest, a name taken from the Mahomedans, Miyan meaning the most respected. ### [v3.c41.s2.9](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.9) Thus we have three sub-sections of the Kshatriyas of India; subsections which probably came into existence between 1100 to 1200 or 1300 A. D. viz. 1st the Rajputs of the 36 clans inhabiting Rajputana, Gujarat, Kathiawar, U. P. and Eastern Panjab; 2nd Rajputs of Western Himalayas and 3rd the Maratha Kshatriyas. These three groups do not intermarry and do not interdine and they may, therefore, be looked upon as real sub-castes with their usual restrictions. Though the sub-castes of pure Kshatriyas thus are only three, there are numerous other sub-castes who claim to be Kshatriyas and whose existence probably goes back to our sub-period. We may, of course, include those Kshatriyas who are considered lower in grade because they follow the occupation of agriculture, the Rāthis for example of the Himalayan region and the Marathas of the Deccan. The words Rāthi and Maratha probably have a common origin viz. Rāṣṭra\* which shows that they form the country, being the common people or the settled agriculturists and must be distinguished from the Śudras or labourers. The description by Al-Beruni of the four castes, however, indicates that while the Rajputs or Kshatriyas were treated as equals of Brahmins, the agricultural Kshatriyas and Vaiśyas had come to be looked upon as not much superior to Śudras, being prohibited the study of the Veda. Besides these agricultural Kshatriyas, there were other sub-castes which also claimed the rank of Kshatriyas and which must have come into existence in this sub-period such as Bundellas, Raghuvansis &c. though we have no positive written evidence about their claim. The tendency of Hindu society at all times in India is to establish various sub-castes which usually claim to be included in the higher varṇa nearest to them. ### [v3.c41.s2.10](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.10) ∗ The word Rāṣṭrika in Aśoka inscriptions is explained by Smith as meaning inhabitants of Western Ghats but the word may indicate these Rāthis of the Himalayan region also. ### [v3.c41.s2.11](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.11) The Kshatriyas of South India claim to belong to solar and lunar races also. They form a separate sub-caste which we have not taken into consideration in the above enumeration. So far as we have seen, we have not found in inscriptions an example of a South India Kshatriya marrying a northern Kshatriya princess. The Dravida warrior clans were no doubt treated as Vrātya Kshatriyas by the Manusmṛiti and the Purāṇas support their solar and lunar race origins. The Āndhra Kshatriyas are called Rāju-a Sanskrit word-and Vellala. It is unnecessary to go further into the status of the Kshatriyas of South India as we have not found the subject discussed at length anywhere. ### [v3.c41.s2.12](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.12) NOTE:-THE 36 RULING FAMILIES OF KSHATRIYAS. ### [v3.c41.s2.13](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.13) We have held that the list of 36 ruling families of Kshatriyas was made during the reign of Chandra Gāhadavāla who is said in inscriptions to have rehabilitated the Solar and Lunar Kshatriya races. This king ruled from 1080 to 1100 A. D. and the 36 families then enumerated must have been actually ruling at that time. We have not got the original list; but two ancient lists, incomplete and rather incorrect, are given by Tod viz. the Rāsā list and the Kumārapāla Charita Sanskrit list (the other two given by him seem to be later as they contain undoubtedly later names). If we compare these two lists they appear to be copies from the same original list. Let us see how they agree and differ. ### [v3.c41.s2.14](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.14) | Rāsā List. | Kumārapāla-Charita Sans. List. | | Ravi | Ikshvāku | | Śaśi | Soma | | Yadu | Yadu | | Kakustha | X | | Paramāra | Paramāra | | Sadāvara | X | | Chauhan | Chauhan | | Chālukka | Chālukka | | Chhindaka | Chhindaka | | Silāra | Silāra | | Abhīra | X | | Doyamata | { Makvāna | | Makvāna | | | Chapotkaṭa | Chapotkaṭa | | Parihāra | Parihāra | | Dhānyapālaka | Dhānyapālaka | | Rājyapālaka | Rājyapālaka | | Nikumpa | Nikumpa | | Hula | Hūṇa | | Guhila, Guhilaputta | Ohila X | ### [v3.c41.s2.15](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.15) From the note of Gaurishankar on this list we find there are some eight or nine names which are found in the Kumārapāla-Charita list which were omitted by Tod and the three out of which found in the other list are, ### [v3.c41.s2.16](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.16) | Rathod | Rath. | | Kārattapāla | Kārattapala | | Aniga | Anaga. | ### [v3.c41.s2.17](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.17) There are many names in both lists which are now unidentifiable; and even Tod could not identify them. Moreover the identification by Tod of some is unquestionably mistaken, as it could not but be, in the absence of the epigraphic evidence which we now possess. We proceed to show how this list, especially that in the Rāsā, correctly depicts the political state of the country and its Rajput kingdoms about 1100 A. D. We take the identification of names made by us in Vol. II. ### [v3.c41.s2.18](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.18) The first five namely Kakustha (Kachapaghāta), Paramāra Sadāvara (Tomara), Chāhamana, Chhandāka (Chandella) are the well-known kingdoms of Gwalior, Malwa, Delhi, Sambhar and Bundelkhand described in this volume. The sixth Silāra is the Śilāhāra kingdom of Thana. The seventh Abhiyara or Ahira kingdom has not been located by Tod but it must have been in southern India. Chapotkaṭa and Parihara were the kingdoms of Anhilwad and Kanauj which had just passed away but there still must have been small kingdoms remaining such as that of Mandawar of the Pratihāras. ### [v3.c41.s2.19](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.19) The Guhilot kingdom of Mewad was well known as also the small kingdom of the Guhilas in Mangrol (Kathiawar) already described (p.301). The Yadus under whom come now Yadavas, Bhattis and the Jādejas and Chudāsamas of Kathiawar were represented then by the Yadavas of Biana and Mathura or Mahāban. The Bhātis of Jaisalmere are not mentioned in this list because probably they were not then in Jaisalmere which according to tradition was founded in 1157 A. D. (Gaurishankar’s Tod p. 224) and the latter two were not yet established in Kathiawar and Cutch which were then under the Chālukyas of Anhilwad. The Tānks had a kingdom at this time at Kāsht-ha on the Jumma as pointed out by Tod. They are not, according to our view, descendants of Takshaka Nāga as many imagine. The Hūnas had a kingdom at Badoli on the east coast of the Chambal opposite Bhaisroda "where in a beautifully carved temple there is a Hūna Vivāha Mandapa." (Gaurishankar’s Tod). The Gaudas or Gaurs have nothing to do with the Senas of Bengal whose power was established in Bengal itself later than 1100 and who are consequently not mentioned in this list. They came from Guda or the country about Thanesar and they had at this time an extensive kingdom about Ajmer which was taken from them by the Chauhans as tradition recorded by Tod states. (This tradition is not believed by some). The Badgujars also were a powerful ruling family then and were in possession of the country round Amber with Rajpur as their capital and from this they were dispossessed by the Kachhwāhas according to another tradition recorded by Tod. They are mentioned in the Rāsā list under the name of Garua which certainly is the Prakrit form of Gurjara. Nikumpa lastly had a kingdom at that time in Khandesh as an inscription noted by Gaurishankar dated 1153 A. D. proves. They had also a small kingdom in Jaipur territory. Nikumps, therefore, unlike the Silāhāras are both Northern India and Southern India Kshatriyas. Among the Marathas their name is now pronounced Nikam. ### [v3.c41.s2.20](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.20) Besides these, we have of course the mention of Rathod or Rāṭh and Rājapala, the leading kingly families of Kanauj and Monghyr, while the Kalachūri Haihayas of Chedi are also included in the Rāsā list. What ruling families the other names indicate it is difficult to decide and neither Tod nor Gaurishankar or Mohanlal Pandya has been able to ascertain. The Dāhimas were well-known and as descendants of Dadicha Rishi are mentioned in inscriptions; but the name given in the Rāsā list is Dadhishat. This amśa is detailed in an inscription dated 1000 A.D. in the Kansern temple in Parbatsar Dt. Jodhpur State (E.I. XII p. 61). They were feudatories of the Chāhamanas of Sāmbhar. They migrated from Thalner on the Godavari to Marwad, and held Parbratsar, Jalor and Sanchor up to 1300 A.D. "Chhacha (the insoriptor) was a ruling prince and not an Ādā Rajput (ditto)," Kārat-tapāla, however, are not Kathis and Kathis had no kingdom in Kathiawar about 1100 A. D. Nor can Jats be mentioned in the list as they never were looked upon as Kshatriyas, nor had they any kingdom at this time. In the absence of historical evidence we can only say that the remaining names of ruling families are not yet ascertainable. ### [v3.c41.s2.21](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.21) KĀYASTHAS. ### [v3.c41.s2.22](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.22) The Kāyasthas who claim to be of Kshatriya origin find frequent mention in the inscriptions of this sub-period. They can be included in the Kshatriya varṇa though they form an intermediate caste according to the Smṛitis. The Kāyasthas were writers by profession and hence as writers of inscriptions they are constantly mentioned. They too seem to be divided at this time into sections according to their country of residence, like the Brahmins; for we have mention of a Gauḍa Kāyastha in an inscription dated 1000 A.D. (E. I. XII p. 6); the word anvaya is not used here; but where it is used it indicates the family such as Naigamānvaya of Bijolia Insc. (Bengal J. R. A. S. LV p. 40) or Gauḍānvaya of Siwalik pillar Insc. (I. A. XIX p. 218). It may be noted that we sometimes come across Kāyastha writers in inscriptions from southern India, as in the Konkan insc. of Aparāditya. The tradition among the Kāyastha Prabhus of Konkan that they came there from Northern India in later days may be reconciled with this mention of Kāyasthas in about 1100 by holding that these are represented now by the Davane Kāyasthas.\* ### [v3.c41.s2.23](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.23) VAIŚYA. ### [v3.c41.s2.24](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.24) The Vaiśyas also split into sub-divisions during this sub-period, following the example of Brahmins, on the basis of habitat. There is no mention, however, in the records of the period, of the names of the modern 84 sub-divisions of the Vaiśyas of Northern India. There are some family names such as Prāgvātānvaya or Kārāpaka Vamśa (Bijolia Insc.). There is also a mention of Poravāla and of Modha (I.A. XI p.72), Modhānvaya-prasūta-Mahākshap.; but the word anvaya added shows that they were family names and not names of sub-castes. These Vaiśyas were often Jains and hence perhaps the sub-sections were not endogamous. In the south and in the Himalayan region, there were Vaiśyas who were Śaivas; the temple of Baijanāth in Kangra is stated in its inscription to have been built by two Vaiśya brothers; and the Lingāyat Vaiśyas in the south are well known as Vīraśaivas. ### [v3.c41.s2.25](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s2.25) ∗ The word Prabhu is added in this inscription to a minister's name and not to the name of the Kāyastha writer. ### Śudras. ### [v3.c41.s3.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s3.1) It is needless to say that the Śudras must also have subdivided at this time into innumerable sections not only on the basis of the province of residence, but also of their innumerable employments; each profession or employment consolidating itself into a sub-caste restricting marriage to itself. Indeed at this time the practice of Anuloma marriage entirely ceased, as we shall presently show, and every caste and sub-caste from the Brahmins downwards restricted marriage to itself. This together with ideas of purity and peculiarities of food and customs was a great incentive to the formation of sub-castes all over the society. The formation of all the innumerable sub-castes in every varṇa or chief caste and intermediate caste into which Hindu society is divided at present took place, according to our view, during this sub-period (1000-1200), whereas in the preceding sub-periods the main castes and intermediate castes were one and undivided throughout India. Although, therefore, Al-Beruni mentions only four varṇas following the Smṛitis, the tendency to the development of sub-castes had arisen even in his time; but the actual division took place after him. ### Untouchables. ### [v3.c41.s4.1](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s4.1) From the most ancient times, the outcasts or untouchables were divided into many classes and they always lived outside of towns and villages. Those usually mentioned in inscriptions are Meda and Chāṇḍāla, the scavenger and the executioner, who were the lowest among them. But Al-Beruni gives other names. He describes the outcasts as follows: "After the Śudra follow the people called Antyaja who render various kinds of services and who are not reckoned among any caste. There are eight classes of them, who freely intermarry with each other, except the fuller, the shoe-maker and the weaver. These eight guilds are fuller, shoe-maker, juggler, basket and shield maker, sailor, fisherman, hunter of wild animals and birds and weaver. These gilds live near the villages and towns of the four castes and outside them." ### [v3.c41.s4.2](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s4.2) "The people called Hāḍi, Doma, Chāṇḍāla and Badhatau, are not reckoned among any caste or guild. They are occupied with dirty work like the cleansing of the village. They are considered as one sole class. In fact they are considered like illegitimate children and they descend from Śudra father and Brahmani mother as children of fornication. Therefore, they are outcasts". (Sachau Vol. I chap. X). The above extract shows that even in Al-Beruni's time (1030 A. D.) there were two main divisions of the outcasts, the second one being the worse of the two. Indeed Khurdadba (900 A. D.) also mentions two untouchables' castes viz. the Chāndāla and the Lahuda. The latter viz. Lahuda were rope-dancers or natas. Thus this two-fold division is very old and the eight untouchables of the Lahuda class mentioned by Al-Beruni are exactly those enumerated in a Smṛiti text viz. the fuller, the shoe-maker, the weaver, the basket-maker, the rope-dancer, the fisherman, the hunter and the juggler. That they intermarried except the first three is a strange observation which perhaps may be a mistake. At any rate in modern times, they do not, following the usual tendency of all Hindu sub-castes to restrict marriage to their own self. It passes understanding why the fuller, the weaver and the basket-maker should have been treated as untouchable. They had no doubt been treated as such until recently. Being a subdivision with work not unclean and with marriage restricted to itself as mentioned by Al-Beruni, their untouchability was nominal. And since they have now become touchable, there is no reason why the other five classes of the same list should remain untouchable. The word Dom is not found in the Smṛitis nor Hādi and the word Badhatau is inexplicable. These four untouchable castes performed uncleanly work and must have, therefore, been treated as most untouchable. ### [v3.c41.s4.3](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s4.3) Caste in India, as we have elsewhere explained, rests on racial as well as occupational difference and it is well-known that the first three varṇas are Aryans by race, as also the castes intermediate between them. The Śudras and the untouchables are Dravidian by race. The main profession of Brahmins is that of religious service and of Kshatriyas is that of arms. Vaiśyas were agriculturists in ancient times; but they gave up agriculture in the Buddhist period as it involved the killing of insects (see Vol. II p. 182). In mediæval times the occupation of agriculture mainly belonged to Śudras; and Khurdadba in 900 A. D. ### [v3.c41.s4.4](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41.s4.4) properly says that Śudras were those who were husbandmen by profession (ditto p. 172). But while Vaiśyas gave up agriculture, some Brahmins and Kshatriyas took to agriculture in the mediæval period and the Parāśara Smṛiti by a special provision made it allowable (see Vol. II p. 183). But this led to the degradation of these to the status of Śudras as in the Deccan and even in the Himalayan region. The Nagarkotia Brahmins, we were informed in Kangra, did not intermarry or interdine with the local Brahmins who were agriculturists and who are now even labourers or coolies. The Rāthis who are Kshatriya agriculturists in the Himalayan region are admitted to be only third grade Kshatriyas who may give daughters to, but cannot take daughters from, higher grade Kshatriyas. We find local agriculturist Brahmins similarly treated as Śudras by new-coming Brahmins in Orissa (see Vol. II). In the Deccan there are some agriculturist Brahmins who are also looked upon as degraded, and the agriculturist Kshatriyas, Malis and others, are treated, though mproperly, as Śudras. _First 59 of 261 passages. [Read on](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41)_ ## Linked texts (34) - [Bhāgavatapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.bhagavata) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Rājataraṅgiṇī](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.historical.kashmir.rajatarangini) — Kalhaṇa, Sanskrit - [Mānava Dharmaśāstra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.manu) — Manu & Bhṛgu, Sanskrit - [Sarvadarśanasaṅgraha](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.sarvadarsanasangraha) — Mādhava, Sanskrit - [Gītagovinda](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.kavya.muktaka.gitagovinda) — Jayadeva, Sanskrit - [Parāśarasmṛti](https://indike.org/pramana/in.niti.dharma.parasara) — Parāśara, Sanskrit - [Basavapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.sampradaya.saiva.virasaiva.basavapurana) — Sanskrit - [Pañcarātra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.plays.bhasa.pancaratra) — Bhāsa, Sanskrit - [تحقيق ما للهند من مقولة مقبولة في العقل أو مرذولة](https://indike.org/pramana/inf.isl.ar.biruni.tahqiq-ma-lil-hind) — Arabic - [Āptamīmāṃsā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.anuyoga.phil.aptamimamsa) — Samantabhadra, Sanskrit - [Aitareyāraṇyaka](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.aranyaka.aitareya) — Sanskrit - [Naihati Plate of Vallālasena, year 11](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.east.bengal-charters.naihati-plate-of-vallalasena-year-11) — Sanskrit - [Brahmasūtra](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.vedanta.brahmasutra) — Bādarāyaṇa, Sanskrit - [Epigraphia Indica](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.corpora.ei) - [Mahābhārata](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.mahabharata.vyasa) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Pāśupata](https://indike.org/pramana/in.sampradaya.saiva.pasupata) — Sanskrit - [Raghuvaṃśa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.kavya.mahakavya.rama.raghuvamsa) — Kālidāsa, Sanskrit - [Ṛgvedasaṃhitā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.samhita.rg) — Sanskrit - [Indian Antiquary](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.corpora.ia) - [Purāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana) — Sanskrit - [Sāṃkhya](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.samkhya) — Sanskrit - [Vālmīkirāmāyaṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.ramayana.valmiki) — Vālmīki, Sanskrit - [Yoga](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.yoga) — Sanskrit - [Bhagavadgītā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.all.gita) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Vedānta](https://indike.org/pramana/in.darsana.vedanta) — Sanskrit - [Śvetāśvataropaniṣad](https://indike.org/pramana/in.veda.upanisad.mukhya.svetasvatara) — Śvetāśvatara, Sanskrit - [Skandapurāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/in.purana.skanda) — Vyāsa, Sanskrit - [Bāṇa](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.deccan.bana) - [Jagannath Temple](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.jagannath-temple) - [Somnath Temple](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.monument.somnath-temple) - [Kumārapālacarita (Prākṛtadvyāśraya)](https://indike.org/pramana/in.lit.historical.jaina.dvyasraya.kumarapalacarita) — Hemacandra, Prakrit - [Pañcādhyāyī](https://indike.org/pramana/in.jaina.anuyoga.phil.tattva.jivajiva.pancadhyayi) — Rājamalla 1560, Sanskrit - [Śivagītā](https://indike.org/pramana/in.sampradaya.saiva.stotra.sivagita) — Amarjī, Sanskrit - [Basahi plate of Govindachandra. Samvat 1161](https://indike.org/pramana/inp.epigraphy.north.gahadavala.basahi-plate-of-govindachandra-samvat-1161) — Sanskrit --- Source: [https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41](https://indike.org/pramana/ins.general.vaidya-1921.v3.c41) · Pramāṇa