models of caste and the left-hand division

in South India

MAlllSON MINES-University of California, Santa Barbara

The KaikkooLars of Tamilnadu State, South India, are a caste of the left-hand section liv-
ing in a social world that i s divided between left and right. Right-hand and left-hand sym-
bolic classification, a worldwide phenomenon (Needham 1973), is perhaps nowhere more
elaborate than in India. Although a fading memory in the Salem-Erode region of Tamilnadu
where I conducted fieldwork, this moiety division of castes into right and left (vaLangkail
iiDangkai jati) continues to influence caste behavior. The division’s character lends support
to the idea that the social structure of some civilizations i s dichotomized by the different
loci of power on which the artisan-merchants (the left-hand) and the landowning communi-
ties (the right-hand) base their strengths (see Beck 1970; David 1974; Stein 1980). Brahmans
do not belong to either section; but as priests, they occupy a ritual status that is distinctive
and superior.
There is much about the KaikkooLars, or Sengunthar Mudaliyars, that makes them
distinctive. Some of their features call into question current models of caste. Over the past
two decades, Marriott’s (1959,1968) transactional model and Dumont’s (1970b) dual model
have dominated discussion of Indian caste ranking. Both models depict castes as in-
tegrated, interdependent, unitary hierarchies; caste ranking i s seen as essentially a
homogeneous system in which all castes, from top to bottom, participate. Even at the level
of the excluded bottom-the untouchables-Moffatt (1979) demonstrates replication of
the system. It appears, however, that there are Hindu castes that do not f i t either model.
Heesterman (1973:99-100) notes that historically, castes of the right-hand section fit the
hierarchical, integrated model of jati stratification, but castes of the left-hand section do
not. Heesterman argues that the right-hand section is characterized by what Dumont calls
the kingly model, in which land-based power and interdependence articulate the hierarchy.
The left-hand section i s characterized by the priestly model, a stress on purity, and in-

Historical/y, castes in South India were divided into right-hand and left-hand
sections. This paper is an examination of the KaikkooLars, a caste of weaver mer-
chants belonging to the left-hand section. In many features this caste is distinc-
tive, the source of i t s uniqueness being the caste‘s social and economic
marginality that allows i t s members a degree o f separateness from the agrarian-
based village. The implications of this separateness for theories of caste are ex-
plored. It is argued that because anthropologists have concentrated their
research on the agrarian village, they have widely overlooked mercantilism as a
locus of power in rural India. [caste, right-hand/left-hand division, dual organi-
zation, symbolism, mercantilism, India]

Copyright 0 1982 by the American Ethnological Society

00944496/82/030467-18$2.30/1

models of caste 467

dependence among jatis. Heesterman (1973:98-100) feels that this dichotomy represents an
inner conflict of tradition and indicates that not all castes can be ranked by an integrating
hierarchy of values as represented by Dumont’s model. Heesterman’s view also contradicts
Marriott’s transactional model, since the former depicts castes that are outside the power-
integrated system of ranking.
It will become clear, as this paper progresses, that the KaikkooLars do not f i t either
model of caste ranking. I argue that the source of this uniqueness is found in their social
and economic marginality t o the agrarian-based castes which, in turn, stems from their
status as artisan-merchants. Several questions are addressed in demonstrating the special
place of KaikkooLars and the left-hand castes, First, it is necessary t o determine the extent
t o which they are a part of an interdependent caste hierarchy, following Marriott‘s model.
Second, the extent t o which the KaikkooLars embrace an integrating hierarchy of values, in
the manner of Dumont’s model, is assessed. Third, the accuracy of Heesterman’s conclu-
sion that the right-hand/left-hand dichotomy represents an inner conflict of tradition be-
tween the kingly and the Brahmanical is examined. Finally, in the last section of this essay,
the implications of the KaikkooLars’ marginality are assessed.

KaikkooLars and their intercaste relationships

Who are the KaikkooLars and to what extent are they part of an integrated, interdepen-
dent caste hierarchy, as Marriott’s transactional model of caste ranking depicts? The Kaik-
kooLars are a large, ancient (see Stein 1968:87; 1975:75; 1980:183-184) weaver caste living
in Tamilnadu State, South India. The term KaikkooLar refers to their occupation as weavers
(kai [hand], kool [shuttle], ar [people]), but they are also moneylenders and textile mer-
chants. They live throughout the state but can be found in particularly large concentrations
in certain cities and towns that are centers of weaving. The Salem-Taramangalam-Trichen-
gode-Erode region of the Salem and Coimbatore districts, where the fieldwork on which
this paper i s based was conducted, i s one such area. Although many families and certain
segments of the caste are vegetarians, most KaikkooLars are meat-eaters and make blood
sacrifices of goats, chickens, and pigs t o lineage gods. Vegetarians and nonvegetarians in-
termarry.
Such behavior i s generally taken as an indication that at least in Brahmanical terms, the
caste ranks low. That many eat the flesh of the pigs they sacrifice seems to confirm this.
Pig-eaters are untouchables, according t o the reasoning of most South Indians. Their low,
even untouchable, status seems confirmed by historical research as well. For example,
Frykenberg 1977; 1978:personal communication) believes that the KaikkooLars were
untouchable in mid-19th-century Tinnevelly because they were forcibly excluded from us-
ing the streets of the landed and dominant Vellalas. Another indication of low status was
the custom of dedicating daughters as deevi-daasis to Shiva temples, as recently as the ear-
ly 20th century. Since prostitution was associated with this practice, the custom is con-
sidered a sign of loose morals and low status.
Although the KaikkooLars appear t o have been untouchables in some regions, in others
they seem t o have occupied a more exalted but s t i l l low status. Today, KaikkooLars are
staunch Shivites, but Stein (1968:87) notes that they had “the ritually pregnant task of offer-
ing coconut t o the deity” at the Srirangam temple (a Vishnivite temple at Tiruchirapalli) 600
to 900 years ago. KaikkooLars commonly appear to be juxtaposed to the dominant land-
owners of their region, who are of the right-hand section, but t o have little in-
terdependence. At Srirangam, “the temple accountant [koyil kanakkan] was a member of
the dominant Sudra agricultural community of Tamil country, the Vellalas.. .” (Stein

468 american ethnologist

1968:87). Thus, although the KaikkooLars are clearly not untouchable, Stein assigns them
low-caste sudra status.
Today, the KaikkooLars are clearly not untouchable, and the complexity and indepen-
dence of their caste organization suggests a much higher status. Since Vijayanagar times
(ca. ISSO), they have been organized into a network of interconnecting caste councils
known as the 72 naaDu (provinces). Although parts of the system are now defunct, it s t i l l ex-
ists and is considered territorially and administratively to define the KaikkooLars as a
single, independent, but widely dispersed caste. Features of KaikkooLar status, therefore,
suggest both high and low status.
Today, in Salem-Erode, few remember the right-hand/left-hand distinction clearly, but in
the 19th and early 20th centuries the two sections were in belligerent-status conflict. The
opponents were the landowning Vellala KavuNDars and the landless KaikkooLars. What re-
mains of the conflict is a dichotomy among the castes. One elderly informant listed the
castes in the following way. Aligned on the right-hand are the dominant, landowning
Vellala KavuNDar, a moiety of Nasuvan (barbers), Vannan (washermen), and Parayan
(agricultural laborers and drummer untouchables).’ Aligned on the left are the Kaik-
koolars, some types of Chettiars (business castes), Vettuvar KavuNDars (hunter KavuN-
Dars), a distinct moiety of Nasuvan (barbers), Padayachis (agriculturalists claiming warrior
status), Acharis (artisans), Kottanaar (builders), Maadeeri Chakkal i s (leatherworkers) and
Kuyavan (potters). What i s striking i s that the right-hand castes are all dependent on the
landowning KavuNDars. The castes of the left-hand division do not have this kind of eco-
nomic dependence. Most are artisans and to some degree are economically independent of
the land. KaikkooLars say that they are similar t o Padayachis in origin and are the same in
rank. Padayachis in the vicinity of Trichengode formerly paid a tax t o the KaikkooLars’ pan-
chayat at Trichengode
An examination of the KaikkooLar local organization reveals the nature of their involve-
ment with other castes and the degree of their independence. One of the striking features
of the caste i s the degree to which i t s local organization i s replicated wherever KaikkooLars
live. At the local level, KaikkooLar identity involves a social geography centered around an
area of common land known as the pavadi, land which may be used for stretching pavu or
warps. The pavadi i s located near the caste’s Murugan temple. In urban settings, the temple
and i t s mada viiti (temple streets) demarcate the community’s geographic center and incor-
porate the pavadi and the caste meeting hall, which in the village i s the temple. A caste
school may also be found here. In towns and cities, another source of pride i s the festively
lit marriage hall (kalyanam mandabam). Marriage halls are a relatively recent form of osten-
tation for the middle- and upper-class KaikkooLars, whose marriages during the last 20
years have become large, expensive affairs.
The KaikkooLar sections of towns and villages are homogeneous. Weavers say this i s
partly because weaving is labor intensive and requires that relatives live sufficiently near
each other to be of mutual help. In addition, weavers require the use of the streets for the
sizing of their warps. During the morning and evening hours, warps often fill the streets and
impede traffic. Weavers say that they tolerate this congestion, but others wish to avoid it.
This explanation i s in part a modern rationalization, because other communities (mainly
Nadars and Muslims) that service the looms and size and set up the warps d o not live with
the KaikkooLars, as the explanation would lead one to expect. It i s also clear historically
that KaikkooLars were segregated in some localities (Frykenberg 1977); today, they often
appear to wish to exclude others from their living areas.
The large, homogeneous populations of KaikkooLar areas in Ammapet ward in Salem
City, as in Erode, Taramangalam, and Trichengode, give the KaikkooLars social and politi-

models of caste 469

cal dominance in their section of the city. Thus, in Ammapet, KaikkooLar priests preside
over the Murugan temple, which i s called the Sengunthar Subramaniyam Koyil, and con-
duct all life crisis ceremonies for KaikkooLars. Brahmans are rarely employed as priests;
KaikkooLars dispensed with Brahman priests 40 to 50 years ago because Brahman
ceremonies marked KaikkooLars as inferior.
The KaikkooLars are long-term residents of Ammapet. In the early days, when Ammapet
was only a small village, it had a single Mariyamman temple. Mariyamma, the goddess of
smallpox, i s a central figure in Tamilian ceremonial life, and her temples are significant
markers of community integrity. Several castes may jointly participate in the worship of
this important goddess, but excluded communities replicate her worship on their own.
Thus, each Mariyamman temple demarcates a specific congregation; the presence of two
temples within a single locality indicates exclusion and ritual segregation of the two con-
gregations. Ammapet has two such temples, one in the KaikkooLar area and one in the
other half of the city. The KaikkooLar temple i s called the Sengunthar Mariyamman Koyil,
while the other i s called the Palapattari Mariyamman Koyil, the multicaste Mariyamman
temple. It is significant that the two main temples in KaikkooLar Ammapet bear the Kaik-
koolars’ name, thereby asserting both the control and segregation of the KaikkooLars.
Sengunthar priests preside over them, and primarily Sengunthars go t o them.
The two Mariyamman temples are a short walk from each other, and their mada viiti
(temple streets) share a common border; but the temples are nevertheless mutually ex-
clusive. Today, no one recalls precisely why the KaikkooLars built their own temple, but
the general consensus i s that they made a bid to take control of the original temple while
Chettiars s t i l l dominated the area and that the Chettiars took the KaikkooLars t o court and
won. The KaikkooLars consequently withdrew from the Chettiar-dominated temple and
founded their own.
If we look elsewhere in Tamilnadu during the 19th and early 20th centuries, we find a
probable explanation. KaikkooLars were considered t o be excluded. Frykenberg (1977)
chronicles a major dispute between KaikkooLars and high-caste Vellalas in Tinnevelly over
the right of KaikkooLars t o take their funeral processions through Vellala streets. Ten per-
sons were killed and two or three times that number were wounded (Frykenberg 1977:17).
Elderly KaikkooLar informants told me of similar disputes near Erode in the early 20th cen-
tury between KaikkooLars and landowning KavuNDars. Avoiding confrontation, Kaik-
kooLars appear t o have withdrawn from interaction and t o have replicated in Ammapet not
only the Mariyamman temple, but also all other aspects of their ritual and religious prac-
tices.
Some 50 years ago, the Ammapet KaikkooLars confronted the KavuNDars of surround-
ing villages in another case of exclusion. During the festival of Maatu Pongal, KavuNDars
would drive their cattle in celebration through Ammapet’s streets and markets, and over
the warps stretched out in the streets. On one occasion the KaikkooLars attacked the
celebrators and forced them to stop. This fight may well have represented one of the last
direct confrontations of the strongest castes of the right-hand and left-hand sections. The
KaikkooLars’ success has meant their virtual domination of Ammapet, although today they
are politically diverse.
In another dramatic and volatile confrontation with members of another caste, com-
munity leaders in Ammapet decided a few years ago t o acquire a small piece of land in
front of their Subramaniyam Koyil. This would enable passersby to see from the street
through the temple gate t o the god. A Naicker owned the land, upon which was a small
Naicker shrine visited by Naickers in years past for a minor annual festival. Assuring the
owner that a place for the Naicker god would be kept, the KaikkooLars repeatedly offered
to buy the land. The Naicker nonetheless refused to sell, often with a flourish of invectives.

470 american ethnologist

Insulted and outraged, the negotiating KaikkooLar leader, on one occasion, struck the
owner resoundingly and swore that the KaikkooLars would take the land with or without
compensation. The Naicker fearfully sold the land, calculating that his chances of holding
out against the numerically superior KaikkooLars were slim.
These stories illustrate the KaikkooLars’ reputation for aggressiveness and bellicosity, as
well as their segregation by withdrawal and exclusion in Ammapet. They are masters in
their locality and so have a certain independence, but they are also isolated there. Weav-
ing, textile mercantilism, and moneylending gave the caste economic independence, social
separateness, and mobility. For example, in the early 20th century many KaikkooLars first
came to Erode partly to escape the aggressive dominance of KavuNDars in surrounding
villages. Similarly, in Akkamapettai, a village near Trichengode and Erode with a con-
centrated weaver population, KaikkooLars have little economic contact with the KavuN-
Dar Zamindar of the village. But their independence has only recently been complete, for
until some 20 years ago KaikkooLars of this village took unsettled disputes to KavuNDar
mediators, known as uur kavuNDar. Today, if disputes are not settled within the caste,
KaikkooLars turn to the police and the courts. Moffatt (1979:72) notes a similar
separateness in a village near Madras City:

The Sengunthar Mudaliyars are thus not directly connected to the land, and their overall economic
position in Endavur is not strong. Despite its relatively high rank, the caste in no way shares in the
dominance of the village; its only potential effect on village-level politics is in the sheer number of
votes its members can bring to village-level elections. Nor has it any strong vertical relations by
which it can enforce authority over the Harijans; there are no Harijans in paNNaiyaaL [traditional
subordinate labor tie with a member of a dominant caste] tied-labor relations to members of the
Sengunthar Mudaliyar caste.

The expression of this separateness seems t o me to be based on economic and religious

distinctiveness and on territorial homogeneity.
The data presented above indicate that KaikkooLars are not part of an integrated, inter-
dependent caste hierarchy. Their status is ambiguous because they do not enter into rela-
tionships of economic interdependence with other castes, which would thus define their
status. It cannot be said that they are not interested in dominance and power, for they are.
Until recently, however, they have had little wealth, and their occupation, while giving
them independence from the landowning KavuNDars, could not sustain an array of
dependents as does agriculture. KaikkooLars and KavuNDars live near each other, but in
Akkarnapettai and Ammapet no ties of any kind exist between them. The exclusiveness of
the KaikkooLars’ behavior is characteristic. They have their own priests, their own temples,
their own residential areas, and their own system of councils (the 72 naaDu). In other words,
they segregate themselves from interaction with other castes and have to some extent been
excluded, as the example of the Ammapet Mariyamman temples demonstrates and as
Frykenberg’s records for mid-19th-century Tinnevelly show.
The KaikkooLars’ system of caste administration, the 72 naaDu, establishes their claim to
independent status as a caste that rules itself and has done so since Vijayanagar times.
What i s important is not that the system i s disappearing, but that they have the heritage
(see Thurston 1909). The naaDu are a territorially defined set of judicial and administrative
councils that are ordered in a pyramidal hierarchy of increasing authority and territorial
jurisdiction. Each naaDu has within i t s territory a series of village-based KaikkooLar coun-
cils, called pavadi councils because they meet on the community’s common land. One
council in each locality acts as the presiding council (meeLnaaDu [west land]) for each of
that locality’s other village councils (keeRnaaDu [east land]). The 72 naaDu are, in turn, sub-
ject t o the authority of four thisainaaDu (places of jurisdiction). Trichengode i s the thi-
sainaaDu for the region known as EeRuurunaaDu (region of seven cities), of which Salem i s

models of caste 471

a member. The thisainaaDu are themselves controlled by the mahaanaaDu of Con-
jeepuram, which is the residence place of the KaikkooLar patron deity Kamatchiyammal.
Events that affect a region or disputes that cannot be settled locally are handled by the thi-
sainaaDu, which uses the sanction of outcasting a whole naaDu t o enforce i t s decisions.
EeRuurunaaDu i s s t i l l cohesive enough to use this sanction.
Disputes which involve more than one thisainaah, or which are appealed, go to the
mahaanaaDu. The mahaanaaDu, however, has not functioned in 40 years. Urbanization,
economic diversification, political divisiveness, and a penchant for lawyers and litigation
have long ago undermined much of the system’s authority. Nonetheless, the naaDu system
is s t i l l regarded by KaikkooLars as a sign of their cohesiveness and independence, and their
glory and stature.
The EeRuurunaaDu meeting I witnessed in Trichengode illustrates the system’s continu-
ing importance in this region. The meeting took place during an annual religious
festival -the Ardhanareeswarar temple cart festival, which occurs annually during the
Tamil month of Vaikasi (May-June). Trichengode’s Ardhanareeswarar temple is a large and
ancient one, drawing pilgrims from throughout Tamilnadu. I t s earliest stone inscription
dates from A.D. 906 (Census of India 1961:548), but references to it appear in the Tamil
classic Silappathikaram, which dates from an earlier age. The temple i s famous not only for
Ardhanareeswarar (an embodiment of Shiva and Sakthi), but also for Murugan, known here
as Sengotuvelar. Trichengode has a large, prosperous KaikkooLar community. EeRuuru-
naaDu headquarters are therefore located at an important KaikkooLar population center,
as well as at an important MuruganIShiva temple, the gods with whom the KaikkooLars
identify their creation. Furthermore, the temple’s association with ancient Tamil culture is
important because non-Brahmans believe this culture i s indigenous and representative of
their own glorious past, in contrast to Brahmanical traditions which they think of as im-
posed from outside.
During this festival, the Trichengode thisainaaDu meets t o reaffirm the authority of each
of the village councils in i t s territory. Each council sends its main officers, and a varying
number of villagers also attend. The representatives are fed and lodged for the duration of
the meeting. The meeting consists of four main parts. First, there i s the gathering of
EeRuurunaaDu representatives under the presiding Trichengode naaDu. Great formality is
observed; speakers before the dais wrap their shoulder towels around their waists in
deference. Issues important to EeRuurunaaDu, such as outcasting and readmission, are
handled. All decisions are repeated by a cryer (tandalkaaran), so that all hear clearly. Over
100 men are present on the dais, and persons leaving the meeting ask formal permission of
the presiding officers. The criers of penitent councils prostrate themselves before the body,
while suitable fines, largely symbolic, are discussed. A formal roll call of naaDus is taken,
and representatives reply, indicating how much their village i s donating for the KaikkooLar-
sponsored puja (worship) of Ardhanareeswarar that occurs early the following morning.
Next, in a procession led by drums and nadaswarams, the EeRuurunaaDu proceeds t o the
meeting place of the InainaaDu (equal naaDu), Taramangalam’s council, which has been
meeting elsewhere in the town. Having formally invited the InainaaDu t o join them, the
EeRuurunaaDu return with them to their meeting place. Taramangalam, located 60 k m
north, has a council similar to Trichengode’s. Each year the InainaaDu are invited guests at
the Trichengode cart festival and in return invite the EeRuurunaaDu t o theirs.
The third section of the meeting involves the reinvestment of authority in the officers of
the different village councils and naaDu councils. The two top officers of each coun-
cil -the nathanmaikkaarar (presiding officer) and kariyakkaarar (ranking member)-are
given turbans, as signs of office, in the order of their council’s rank among the attending

472 amerlcan ethnologist

councils. The turbans are tied by a Brahman lyer priest, a rare instance of a Brahman
presiding over a KaikkooLar ritual.
The final section of the gathering occurs when the KaikkooLars, as a community and us-
ing their donated funds, sponsor a puja for Ardhanareeswarar. The bestowal of turbans and
the worship of god, the KaikkooLars say, are the main purposes of the meeting. Pomp and
circumstance give the meeting, which occurs in the course of a single night, a feeling of
dignity and importance. The meetings, the money, and the puja similarly underscore Kaik-
kooLar unity, religiosity, and importance among other worshipers.
Two features of status and worship are outstanding and basic t o KaikkooLar identity in
EeRuurunaaDu and InainaaDu. First i s the reaffirmation of the caste’s structural order, its
territorial conformation, and the sources of the council’s power and authority. Second, and
equally important, is the stress on the gathering of KaikkooLars to worship Shiva, their
father, and Murugan, their leader. Thus, these two aspects of KaikkooLar identity-the ter-
ritorial and the sacred-are reaffirmed. Their actions define the order of their social world,
and their relationship t o the sacred defines their status among men. The structural and the
symbolic intertwine and reinforce one another.

KaikkooLar religious beliefs and the ideology of caste

To what extent do KaikkooLars embrace an integrating hierarchy of values, such as Du-
mont’s model of caste ranking would lead us to expect? According t o Dumont,
Brahmanical ideals are what give the caste system i t s peculiarly Indian character. Central
to these ideals are the ideas of purity and impurity, vegetarianism, nonviolence, and the
ascendancy of the priestly over the kingly, for it is the priest who in ages past sanctified the
king and who sanctifies the dominant caste in the village of today. In Dumont’s model,
politico-economic factors, in combination with these religio-ideological ideas, determine
caste ranking. The politico-economic factors are associated with power vested primarily in
landownership. Dominant landowning castes integrate the caste system by establishing in-
tercaste dependency through their manipulation of economic control. Religio-ideological
factors determine the logic of caste hierarchy. Purity encompasses impurity. Impure castes
are needed to preserve the purity of high castes; the Brahman are the most pure and,
therefore, the highest of castes. Subdued and pure behavior characterize the priestly, or
Brahmanical, model; aggressive and commanding behavior and the manipulation of land-
based power characterize the kingly model.
Beck (1970) suggests that left-hand castes follow the Brahmanical model, while the right-
hand castes form a coherent hierarchy, integrated by power and prestige, following the
kingly model. Like Heesterman (1973:100), who follows her interpretation, Beck considers
the left-hand division t o be “a plurality of separate, mutually independent units,” ranking
among which i s at best vague. As Heesterman says, following the Brahmanical model of-
fers a “way out” of interdependence and hierarchy,’ since rank i s based on relationships.
As a left-hand caste, KaikkooLars should thus follow the Brahrnanical model, although
paradoxically they exclude Brahmans from most interaction. Let us look at KaikkooLar
ideology about themselves.
KaikkooLar self-conception is closely tied with two loci of the sacred, one associated
with nonvegetarian small gods and the other with the vegetarian high gods, Murugan and
Shiva. Murugan is a god of ancient origin in Tamilnadu. The earliest literature of the region
referring to him, the so-called sankam literature, dates t o the 1s t century A . D . (Clothey
1978:26). As a pre-Brahmanical god, Murugan i s seen by Tamilians as the epitome of Tamil
culture and heritage:

models of caste 473

 The deity epitomizes the Tamilian’s growing image of his own Tamil culture-its age, i t s persis-
tence, i t s relative sovereignty in the face of accretions and modification from non-Tamil sources
[typically associated with Brahminicalism], and i t s vigorous and youthful potentiality. In short the
Murugan cultus helps many Tamil adherents answer the question: “Who are we?” [Clothey 1978:2).

The KaikkooLars trace their origins t o Shiva, Parvati, and Murugan. When Shiva i s
creating Murugan, his consort Parvati is frightened. In her flight, nine jewels fall from her
ankle and take the form of nine beautiful women, whom Shiva impregnates with his gaze.
Parvati, enraged with jealousy, curses the nine women so that the infants remain unborn so
long that they grow mustaches, a sign of virility and of their future warrior status. Eventual-
ly, Parvati relents and the nine original KaikkooLar warriors (navavirahaL) are born.
KaikkooLars see Murugan as their caste’s primary god. In early sankam poetry, Murugan
i s depicted as having an ambivalent character-on the one hand benevolent, while on the
other, cruel and fierce. He possesses women and is worshiped with the sacrifice of goats
and cocks, with the use of intoxicants, and with frenzied dance. He is a hunter who
becomes a warrior. Later, with the influx of northern influences, Murugan becomes
Brahmanicalized and i s depicted as a son of Shiva. He i s a peaceful god, as Shiva is, but he
i s also a warrior who vanquishes Surabatma, an evil giant. According t o the myth, Shiva i s
plagued by Surabatma, who i s imprisoning gods. Shiva wishes him destroyed and asks
Murugan to do so. Murugan enlists the aid of a general, Virabahu, whose army is composed
of the nine original KaikkooLars. Together they pursue Surabatma and repeatedly cut off
his head, only to have him sprout another. Eventually, Surabatma has only one head re-
maining and hides by taking the form of a tree. But Murugan detects him and splits him in
two with his spear. From the two halves emerge the cock and the peacock, which Murugan
takes as his emblems, along with the spear.3
The KaikkooLar use the symbols of the cock and the spear on their caste flag to repre-
sent their ties with Murugan. They also call themselves Sengunthars-red (sen), spear
(kuntappadai), people (ar)-again in affirmation of their ties with Murugan, who is known as
a red god. In other words, when KaikkooLars answer the question ”Who are we?“ they do so
by saying they are Murugan’s people (see, for example, the caste memorium published for
the 1976 Erode Meeting).
The KaikkooLars are unaware of the cross-fertilization of their traditions, which is evi-
dent in the Tamil and Sanskritic origins of their beliefs. They are staunchly anti-Brahman
and pro-Dravidian in their attitudes, while simultaneously firmly identifying themselves
with the Sanskritic Shivite tradition and with a Brahmanicalized Murugan. Nonetheless,
there are striking parallels between the early worship of Murugan and the KaikkooLar wor-
ship of small gods and certain beliefs. KaikkooLars perform blood sacrifices to small gods,
and some KaikkooLar women foretell the future while in a state of trance when possessed
by a small god. In terms of personal interests and daily life, these small gods are more im-
portant to worshipers than are either Murugan or Shiva, because they affect the worshipers’
immediate lives and are worshiped in the context of lineage and family; Murugan and Shiva
do not affect lives so immediately. KaikkooLar mantravadis (black magicians) use potions
and matrams t o benefit and curse others, and they also use intoxicants. Until recently, Kaik-
kooLars dedicated women dancers as a feature of their worship of Shiva and Murugan. The
parallels of these customs with early Murugan worship are so striking that it is not too in-
cautious t o suggest that many features of early Murugan worship are s t i l l carried on by
KaikkooLars in the context of this second locus of the sacred. KaikkooLar beliefs and iden-
tity, therefore, are split between two traditions: Brahmanical Shivism and non-Brahmanical
ritual practices.
KaikkooLars do not exhibit a homogeneous religious ideology; theirs embodies an inner
conflict that i s the result of the bifurcation of the sacred in Tamil society into two chief

474 american ethnologist

loci. The first, Brahmanical Shivitism, is outside (exterior to) the family, while the second,
the non-Brahmanical worship of small gods, i s within (interior to) the family. Brahmanical
Shivitism is exterior in the sense that it involves a sacred cosmos that does not directly af-
fect life; it relates t o the transcendence of life, and i t s gods are worshiped by all at almost
any locality. The interior locus, however, directly influences a person’s self and kin, and
kin-centered small gods must be propitiated if well-being i s to be achieved or preserved.
This division of the sacred into two primary loci is ancient in Tamil culture. Hart (1975:47)
notes that a similar distinction between the realms of kin and king i s fundamental to under-
standing early Tamil literature. Dumont (1970a:31) seems close to this idea of bifurcation
when he wonders whether this duality in beliefs may not be the way South Indians see their
society as being constructed.
Despite the importance of vegetarianism to Shivism, each lineage worships a family
god (kuladevam) with blood sacrifices. While Murugan and Shiva are worshiped by all
members of the caste, each family has i t s particular kuladevams, which are located at the
family’s place of origin. A family and i t s individuals will not prosper if they d o not worship
their kuladevam appropriately and at particular times. The first haircutting ceremony of an
infant, and ear and nose boring, are all done at the kuladevam shrine. Unlike the images of
other deities, kuladevams are sometimes depicted as huge, fierce females lying naked on
the ground, molded out of mud. Unlike Murugan and Shiva, they are usually female gods
with insignificant male consorts, although they may be depicted as males. In an attempt to
pull them into the tradition of the great gods, kuladevams are often described as manifesta-
tions of Shiva and his consort Parvati; however, they are never called by these names.
Sacrifices are killed and butchered at the spot, and the cocks and goats are eaten by the
worshipers, some of whom may be intoxicated. Pigs, when sacrificed, are also eaten,
although some prefer not to and give them to Harijans. Generally, pig i s considered a
dangerous but powerful meat and is eaten in conjunction with intoxicants. Otherwise, i t is a
meat only of the very low, the untouchables.
Many KaikkooLars believe that kuladevarns and other small gods who benefit them and
their families demand animal sacrifice. As one middle-aged KaikkooLar explained, he gave
only a milk sacrifice to his kuladevam when his first son was born. When the man subse-
quently fell sick, he realized that his offering had been unsatisfactory; as quickly as he
could, he made the prescribed blood sacrifices. During my fieldwork, this man, who is a
policeman, was bitten by a dog during a prohibition raid on a bootlegger‘s hideout. His wife
and he prayed to his kuladevam that he not fall ill with rabies. They promised to sacrifice a
goat, a chicken, and a pig if all went well, which they subsequently did.
The examples described above demonstrate the importance of kuladevam t o many Kaik-
koolars. One KaikkooLar said people d o not like t o move too far away from their ancestral
homes, because periodically they must be able t o go t o the kuladevarn for worship. Kaik-
kooLar patterns of worship are thus neatly dichotomized. Murugan and Shiva cannot be ap-
proached except as a vegetarian, and there is an acceptance of vegetarianism as an ideal.
Kuladevams, however, demand blood sacrifice. Among KaikkooLars, vegetarianism is an in-
dividual preference of persons who believe the standards of Shivism take precedence over
the worship of the small gods, or it i s the observance of devotees on the weekday they wor-
ship Shiva and Murugan, or during Kaarttikai (November-December), Murugan’s month.

the uniqueness of KaikkooLar identity

Identity i s in some ways a process, ongoing and constantly changing. As society changes
and its place in society changes, a caste modifies i t s image of who it is. This process com-

models of caste 475

monly includes Sanskritization and involves the adoption and adaptation of high-caste
behavior and beliefs typically Brahmanical or kingly in character. The formation of a caste
association using the prestigious name Sengunthar Mudaliyar i s central to this process
among KaikkooLars.
In 1927, the first caste-wide meeting of KaikkooLars was held in Erode. I t s purpose was to
establish a unified Sengunthar identity, to distinguish themselves for all times from the
notorious Moolakaarars, a subsection of the caste known for drumming and the dedication
of daughters to temples as deevi-daasis, and to create the impetus for the social and
economic uplift of the unified caste. Before this time, KaikkooLars were highly fraction-
alized and localized. Under the 72 naaDu, the caste was at best a confederacy of locally
endogamous KaikkooLar communities, some of which were distinctively named by loca-
tion or by distinguishing custom. At the 1927 Erode meeting, it was stressed that all Kaik-
kooLars were part of the same community and that intermarriage should be promoted. ASa
unified community they would have the economic and political clout to bring about their
uplift, A drive was begun to incorporate KaikkooLars, wherever they lived, through the
establishment of local branches of the association. The caste journal, Senguntha Mittiram,
was founded, and a campaign aimed at social uplift through Western education and
economic diversification was begun.
The creation of a caste association and the beginning of statewide meetings mark a
significant turning point in caste strategy and the end of the almost continuous localized
confrontations between KaikkooLars and the right-hand KavuNDars in the Erode region.
After this, KaikkooLars turned their attention from the local arena of the village to striving
for economic and educational betterment, for which they competed on the state and na-
tional levels. Locally, however, more subdued antagonism between the two groups per-
sisted for some time. In Akkamapettai village, for example, for a period of about three
years during the mid-1950s.the Mariyamman festival was not conducted at the jointly used
temple because the village KavuNDars insisted that the KaikkooLars desist from singing a
festival song in which they speak of killing KavuNDars.
Like other castes that have attempted to achieve higher social status, the KaikkooLars
made efforts during the 1920s and 1930s to change low-caste customs. Blood sacrifice,
meat eating, drinking, fighting, and the worship of small gods were internally criticized.
This was also the time of the growing non-Brahman movement. Both Sanskritization and
non-Brahmanism have had their effects. The deevi-daasi tradition was outlawed and many
adopted vegetarianism, while simultaneously the KaikkooLars disposed of the services of
Brahman priests for most ritual purposes.
Nonetheless, despite Sanskritization, the KaikkooLar’s image of themselves as violent
and emotionally uncontrolled persists. KaikkooLars are reputed to be aggressive and easily
angered. They pride themselves on frequent use of violence as a part of political argument,
and they eagerly note that even the smallest KaikkooLar man will fight a bigger man if he i s
insulted. But they also point out that their quick passion leads to divisiveness and pettiness.
They say that if there were a KaikkooLar community of 1 0 0 families, it would be divided
among 50 different political parties, and they know that others say they are crude, uncouth,
and have a reputation for drinking, like untouchables.
These same elements of violence and pettiness are associated with the caste’s greatest
cultural hero, the 12th-century KaikkooLar poet, OTTakkuutar. OTTakkuutar epitomizes
the inner conflict of KaikkooLar identity for he i s at once one of the finest Tamil poets and
also one of the cruelest of men. OTTakkuutar helps to legitimize the KaikkooLar’s claim to
being ancient Dravidians, and, because of his importance as one of the greatest literary
figures in Tamil tradition (kavisakkravartham [king among poets]), he gives them a central

476 amerlcan ethnologist

place in that cultural heritage. OTTakkuutar i s famous for a series of poems known as the
littierabatu, praising Shiva and the KaikkooLar community. The story behind these poems,
which almost every KaikkooLar can repeat, i s that OTTakkuutar was approached by his
community fellows to write laudatory poetry about his caste. At first he rebuffed them,
because he thought this too self-serving. The community threatened to kill him if he re-
fused, and they actually attempted to do so. Finally he agreed, but for a price: each Kaik-
kooLar family in the area was to donate the head of a son from which a throne of 1008
heads was t o be constructed for the poet t o s i t on. One group of KaikkooLars who refused
to give heads were outcaste and are remembered to this day as the Talaikotaa Mudaliyars
(Mudaliyars who did not give heads), now residents of Pondicherry. Sitting on the throne,
OTTakkuutar composed the littierabatu, which was so beautiful that Shiva gave the
decapitated bodies back their heads and lives.
In the Erode KaikkooLar marriage hall i s a large polychrome sculpture of the poet sitting
on his throne of heads. The reader should imagine this fierce image overlooking every mar-
riage conducted in the hall by the KaikkooLar priest. Although KaikkooLars clearly pride
themselves on their violent fierceness and claim to ancient warrior heritage, they are
troubled by the OTTakkuutar story. They ask, “What kind of men are we that we will
sacrifice our own sons for our vanity, and what kind of man is OTTakkuutar that he would
ask for it?” One KaikkooLar said the poet was mad by modern standards. But the am-
bivalence i s clear: KaikkooLar glory is neither Brahmanically controlled nor kingly; it i s pas-
sionate, sometimes petty, and even senselessly violent. The KaikkooLars are simultaneous-
ly great and horrible, Shivites and blood sacrificers, noble warriors and petty bickerers.
They never possess any one of these qualities in i t s pure form. Again, a striking feature of
the story is that it makes no rationalization of OTTakkuutar’s violent demand or of the
KaikkooLar’s acceptance of the terms. There i s no loss of status in the story; OTTakkuutar
and KaikkooLars are great because they are fiercely independent. Neither kingly nor priest-
ly, their model for behavior is their own. They are men very much of the world. I am arguing
that the KaikkooLars’ values and world views are distinctive of their marginal position as
artisan-merchants in caste society. Sanskritization has occurred, but it i s also contradicted
by values that are unique to the caste.
In the context of the Brahmanical ideal of vegetarianism, it i s interesting to note that
painted prominently on the wall of the Sengunthar Subramaniyam Koil in Ammapet is a
picture depicting the worship of Karappan Aiyanar. The painting shows a lingam displaying
the face of Shiva with a bleeding eye. Karappan Aiyanar i s attempting t o stem the flow of
blood by placing his foot against the eye while he gouges out his own eye in an effort of
transference. A person’s foot is ritually unclean, but the uncouth Karappan Aiyanar is only
aware of the suffering Shiva, whom he wishes t o aid. He loves Shiva with his heart, and,
unaware of Brahmanical niceties, he commits a major ritual faux pas-as a hunter, he of-
fers meat as sacrifice to Shiva, who is a strict vegetarian. He does everything contrary to
Brahmanical rule, but he is a man closer t o God than a Brahman shown in the picture as
standing off in the surrounding forest. The Brahman i s an addition to the picture that is not
always represented. The KaikkooLars have added him partly because, like Karappan
Aiyanar, they are not vegetarian as the Brahman is, yet they can be closer to God than the
Brahman. Karappan Aiyanar is loved by God because his heart is pure in i t s love of Him.
The message is clear: one does not have t o be vegetarian to be close to God, nor does one
have to be Brahmanical. Here, again, there is contradiction: Shiva i s vegetarian and wor-
shipers of Shiva should not eat meat; but KaikkooLars do, and they are not innocents like
Karappan Aiyanar. KaikkooLars are aware of this contradiction between their own
nonvegetarianism and the vegetarian ideal of their main high gods. I t causes them some
discomfort.

models of caste 477

priestly models, kingly models, local tradition, and mercantilism

Beck (1970, 1972), in her elaboration of the right-handlleft-hand division, argues that
there are two prestigious models for behavior in the South Indian village: the kingly model
associated with landownership and economic power and the priestly model associated with
the Brahman who always occupies the ritual apex of the caste hierarchy. Lacking land, she
argues, left-hand castes follow the Brahmanical model for behavior. Beck notes, however,
that low left-hand castes tend to combine the two models, a reflection of their own am-
bivalence as to which model to follow, since they rank high in neither. KaikkooLars, ac-
cording t o her reckoning of ritual rank, are the highest of the left-hand castes (Beck
1970:786). If Beck’s logic were correct, the KaikkooLar should closely follow a Brahmanical
mode; but according to her analysis, their social customs are mixed. Indeed, five of the
seven left-hand castes have this mixed background. Only the Cooli Aacaari and the Komut-
ti Cettiyaar are “Brahmanical.” Beck’s ordering, therefore, does not tolerate close scrutiny.
Another weakness of her argument i s the manner in which she measures kingly and
priestly custom. Beck examines ten customs, five associated with the local landowning or
kingly caste and five associated with the local Brahmans, the priestly caste, taken to repre-
sent kingly and priestly custom, respectively. She scores castes according to the degree to
which they hold each of the ten customs and derives a scaling of adherence that she plots
on a continuum between the kingly and priestly poles. Beck seems to be correct in her
recognition of the importance of the customs she uses to determine her scaling. However,
her technique obscures the importance of a local tradition that i s revealed only when the
values and views of individual castes are examined. Beck’s model does not determine
whether the left-handlright-hand distinction is basically a priestly-kingly contrast; instead,
it polarizes the sections as such. In fact, the dichotomy is not so clear cut, as we have
noted.
When ideology and behavior are considered, Beck’s polarization i s greatly weakened,
because, as we have seen, the KaikkooLars of Salem-Erode (also part of KonkunaaDu, the
region in which Beck worked) are definitely not priestly in several contexts. Beck’s model is
too simple to account for the apparent complexity, despite i t s appealing neatness. In her
book, Beck (1972:266) recognizes this ambivalence but does not attempt to explain it.
Finally, there i s the Mutaliyar [KaikkooLar] community, a relatively high-status group which is
caught squarely i n the middle of these right-left division differences. Their ancestry is martial, and
although members of this caste officially belong t o the left, they have come t o identify with the
right in many respects. Thus the Mutaliyar can be seen to vacillate between the two poles of social
organization outlined in this work. In a sense they may be seen as striving for a neutral position like
that of the Brahmans and the PiLLai, both of whom are generally agreed t o stand above this exten-
sive bifurcate structure.

Because she emphasizes the essentially Brahmanical character of the left-hand division,
her model i s troubled by exceptions, the most apparent of which are the Mudaliyar.
The explanation I propose has two parts. First, the ambiguity in custom that Beck notes
among left-hand castes occurs not because of confusion about which model t o follow, but
because their sacred cosmos has two distinct loci that require different forms of worship.
The exterior locus i s Sanskritic and Brahmanical, and so i s KaikkooLar worship of Shiva and
Murugan. Sengunthar Shivite priests are vegetarian, wear the sacred thread, and shave their
foreheads in the Brahmanic fashion. Both alcoholic and sexual abstinence are valued, as i s
control of the passions. But when KaikkooLars are concerned with the sacred locus of the
interior, meat eating, blood sacrifice, spirit possession, and the worship of small gods are all
prominent. The KaikkooLars thus follow both a priestly model and a Dravidian tradition.
This latter tradition i s distinct from the kingly model because the power to command is not

478 american ethnologist

central to it and because it i s concerned with the personal or familial locus of the sacred.
This hypothesis of a local, small-god-oriented tradition, which i s distinctive of the
priestly-kingly dichotomy, is appealing because it helps to explain the perplexing problems
of the deevi-daasi tradition and OTTakkuutar's violence. In modern South India, the deevi-
daasi tradition i s accorded low status; chastity and the control of female sexuality are given
high value. Yet Thurston (1909, I11:37) records that prominent KaikkooLar families were
known to dedicate daughters to temples as deevi-daasis. Why would they do so, if such
practices were considered so low and if their status were thus tainted?
The answer i s that the deevi-daasi tradition was an aspect of Dravidian custom
associated with Shivite worship and also an important element of the KaikkooLar's caste
status as a ranking member of the left-hand moiety of castes. According to Thurston (1909,
II:I28). "There are two divisions among the Daasis, called Valangai (right-hand) and ldangai
(left-hand)." Those of the right-hand section were recruited principally from the Vellalas
and those of the left from the KaikkooLars (1909, ll:127). Dedicating women as daasis was
considered a prestigious right, but in the late 19th and early 20th centuries i t came t o be
viewed with increasing disfavor and so was renounced as a custom by both of these castes.
The KaikkooLar's connection with the daasi tradition represents not their low status but
rather their mirroring of the status of Vellalas, their right-hand counterpart. For both
castes the right to dedicate women was an aspect of their ritual status validated by their
rights and obligations within temples and by the honors that temple Brahmans bestowed on
them. Both castes use the title mudaliar, which folk etymology defines as "they who are
first." Like a gift of wealth, of food, or of cloth t o temples, daasis were given t o the temple
god to whom they were symbolically married. Brahman priests kept, as their right, daasis
for their own use (see Buchanan 1807, 11:267), just as they kept a portion of other gifts.
Daasis also served their respective moiety divisions, and the music and dance they per-
formed as part of their service were aspects of the signs of honor bestowed on those for
whom they performed. The Brahman's use of the daasis and the relative status of the daasis
of the two sections, expressed by whom they served, functioned to mark the statuses of the
respective donating castes. According to Thurston (1909, Il:128) the right-hand daasis were
of a higher, more circumscribed status than the left-hand daasis, but neither division was
allowed t o "have any dealings with men of the lowest castes" on punishment of outcasting.
In other words, KaikkooLars did not perceive their status t o be affected by the practice,
because until the 20th century they interpreted the practice differently.
OTTakkuutar's behavior exhibits a similar kind of indigenous quality. Poets, minstrels,
and musicians, even when attached to a court as OTTakkuutar was, were social outsiders.
When OTTakkuutar demands a throne of KaikkooLar heads, he acts as a man of tremen-
dous power. OTTakkuutar's power i s the power of a great poet whose poetry lives on eter-
nally and is so beautiful as to draw the admiration of gods and men. A poet's power i s akin,
therefore, to the power of the Renouncer, the Yogi, and the mediator, all social outsiders. It
is the power of the mind. OTTakkuutar i s not priestly because he is violent, and he i s not
kingly because he has no dependents. Poetry, music, and dance have the power to affect
the human spirit, and KaikkooLars have been involved in all three. OTTakkuutar's behavior
also suggests a link with a medieval tradition of human sacrifice in South India. Thus,
Arokiaswami (1956:300) notes that epigraphic references t o human sacrifices are found in
KonkunaaDu. OTTakkuutar's demand may simply have been the demand for a grand puja
for Shiva.
I would also argue that KaikkooLar status ambiguity stems from their socioeconomic
marginality, when looked at from the point of view of the land-based castes (see Pocock
1962:85-87). In ancient Chola times, it appears there were three loci of power: the king, the

models of caste 479

dominant agricultural caste, and the artisans and weavers (Stein 1975, 1980; see also David
1974:50 on contemporary Jaffna). All three maintained armies.
We have substantial evidence that mercantile groups maintained [in Chola times] a formidable
military capability which was required by the extensive itinerant trade network of the age. Ayyavole
inscriptions bear this out, as does the famous Polonnaruva inscription of Sri Lanka . . . (ca. 1120) in
which the Tamil iiDangkai veelaikkaarar [left-hand [caste) warriors] are referred t o i n association
with the trade organization of the valanjiyar. References t o KaikkooLar veelaikkaarar have sug-
gested that artisans too were capable of maintaining armed units. . . (Stein 1975:75).

The "armies" are long gone, of course, but they indicate that weavers were to some extent
beyond the control of the dominant, land-based powers. The traditional occupation of
weavers i s not just weaving, but also textile trade. As traders and merchants, weavers move
among villages and towns even today, as Beck (1972:266) notes. Consequently, they are
neither economically confined to a single village nor fully dependent o n dominant
agricultural castes. They are nondominant in the agricultural village, but they have a
degree of separateness or social marginality; they are not so readily dominated as a conse-
quence. Just as the local tradition i s marginal t o the Brahmanic one, the KaikkooLar i s
marginal to the kingly power of agrarian castes.
This economic marginality, seen from the merchants' point of view, stems from their
distinct locus of economic power, the market network. This economically based distinc-
tiveness i s important for explaining the appearance of KaikkooLar untouchable status in
mid-19th-century Tinnevelly (Frykenberg 1977). The KaikkooLars were met with violence
when they attempted t o take a funeral procession through a Vellala street, as though they
were untouchables attempting to enter an area reserved for clean castes. Yet I think that
the assessment of their untouchable status i s wrong for several reasons. First, KaikkooLars
are not presently considered or remembered as untouchables, Second, their historical role
in the important Srirangam temple in ancient times in Tiruchirapalli disallows untouch-
ability. Third, KaikkooLar caste organization i s complex, regional in extent, and very old,
apparently dating back at least to Vijayanagar times (by contrast, evidence we have of un-
touchable caste organization is strikingly local, e.g., Moffatt 1979:57).' Fourth, at least in
some regions, members of neither the right-hand nor the left-hand were permitted to enter
the streets allotted to the other with their marriage, funeral, or festival processions (Ap-
padurai 1974:239); consequently, exclusion alone cannot be taken as a sign of untouchable
status Rather, exclusion may be an outgrowth of the chronic antagonism that existed be-
tween the two sections, of which the KaikkooLars and Vellalas were opposing members.
Marginality offers a better explanation for KaikkooLar exclusion. KaikkooLars are out-
side the landowner-dominated caste hierarchy, yet they demand rights equal to those of
high status (Frykenberg 1977:6). Vellalas responded by attempting domination, a standard
high-caste approach to maintaining control. However, because KaikkooLars are socially
marginal to the economic and social relationships normally used by landowners to
dominate other castes, the Vellalas resorted to exclusion, enforced by physical violence.
Moffatt (1979:72) notes that even untouchables can treat Sengunthars with contempt,
despite their relatively high status, because of their nondominance and their nonagricul-
tural occupation. Marginality, therefore, cuts both ways: the KaikkooLars have few
economic dependents and, consequently, little power over anyone; but, they are also large-
ly free of the economic control of landowners. Marginality more easily explains the Tin-
nevelly situation than does the assumption that KaikkooLars were untouchables. Kaik-
kooLars as marginals, however, are structurally similar t o untouchables who, as structural
inferiors, occupy a kind of marginality (see Turner 1969:125ff.; 1974:237), since marginality
can only be maintained through the use of withdrawal, exclusion, and force.
Appadurai (1974). in his analysis of the left-handlright-hand division of castes, has of-

480 american ethnologist

fered a contrasting explanation for the moiety’s existence. Borrowing Victor Turner’s (1974)
concept of root paradigm, Appadurai argues that the division i s an expression of the sym-
bolic representation of the South Indian “body social,” as divided not only horizontally in-
to the four varnas, but also vertically into the right and left sides. The function of the
paradigm is that it offers a conceptualization of society that while divided into antagonistic
components, is nonetheless of one body. He argues that his conceptualization was ”a
natural method of imposing cognitive order,” important during the long period of South In-
dian history in which there was no overriding centralized power that could settle disputes
among antagonistic “commercial and service castes” in urban areas (Appadurai 1974:250).
The paradigm thus provides a way of conceptually integrating disparate antagonistic
castes into a single social body, as well as providing the framework for ordering their
natural antithesis.
Although Appadurai gives an appealing explanation of the division‘s symbolic function,
he fails to provide a convincing explanation for the causes of the continuing confronta-
tions. The KaikkooLar material suggests that these causes are t o be found in the division of
the economy into land-based and mercantile sectors. Thus, there were present in South In-
dia two different sources of wealth and power used by different caste divisions t o compete
for a supremacy neither could achieve because they did not control both sectors of the
economy. In the 20th century, these sectors lost their determinative importance when both
divisions began to compete for social uplift using the same means: education, government
jobs, control of centralized political power and favor. The division lost i t s importance at
the same time the caste associations, used to integrate caste efforts in this competition,
became important
Finally, we return to the original question of this essay: Are Marriott’s and Dumont’s
models of caste ranking adequate t o explain the social position of the KaikkooLar caste in
Tamilnadu? I have argued that the transactional model i s inadequate. Marriott’s model re-
quires multiplex transactions among castes which demarcate economic and ritual interde-
pendence as the mechanisms by which ranking i s established. Interdependence creates a
unitary hierarchy of castes at the local level, and the marginality of the KaikkooLars con-
tradicts this view. Because of their economic separateness from the dominant agrarian
castes, they have avoided interdependence, and so cannot be ranked by transactions. But
in villages, there are some lower castes who were the KaikkooLars’dependents: a section of
barbers (Nasuvan), leatherworker-drummers (Maadeeri), and castes who were their allies,
such as the Padayachis and Pannirendam Chettiars in the Erode region. M y older infor-
mants tell me that these left-hand castes invariably opposed the land-based right-hand
castes whenever communal riots occurred. Evidence suggests, therefore, that KaikkooLars
were allied with their own loosely organized group of castes, which were and s t i l l are local-
ly independent of the hierarchy of right-hand castes.
It must be noted that Marriott considers withdrawal a mechanism used by upwardly
mobile castes wishing to avoid transactions that would mark them as low. The implication
i s that the caste system is nonetheless a unitary one, wherein rank is worked out as a sum of
economic and ritually significant transactions into which castes enter. KaikkooLars d o use
withdrawal in this manner, but they are also outside or marginal t o the landowner-domi-
nated hierarchy because of their economic and ritual separation from them. I do not
believe that this marginality i s accounted for by Marriott’s model. It i s worth pointing out
that for some time anthropologists have recognized that among castes of middle rank the
precise hierarchy that Marriott’s model represents does not occur. Mayer (1960:44-471,
Pocock (1962:85-87), and David (1974:52-63). for example, describe groups of castes that
are outside or marginal t o the core of hierarchically related castes.

models of caste 481

 Dumont’s dual model of caste ranking also does not adequately account for the social
identity of KaikkooLars. This is because KaikkooLars are neither purely priestly nor purely
kingly in their model for behavior, nor are they confused, as Beck (1970) suggests. Instead,
they are partly priestly, partly kingly, and also partly subscribers t o a third, indigenous
tradition for behavior, one that divides the sacred into two contradictory loci.
Dumont (1970a:27-28) recognizes the importance of the dichotomy between the
vegetarian high gods and the nonvegetarian small gods. He sees this opposition as a ”par-
ticular form of the opposition of purity and impurity, [which is] the principle of the caste
system” (1970a:28). For Dumont, the dichotomy symbolizes the close interdependence of
the high and small gods, which parallels the interdependence of pure and impure castes in
the caste hierarchy. The dominant principle of purity encompasses the secondary principle
of impurity with which it stands in a relationship of contradiction. The impure i s needed to
preserve purity. Small gods stand in an analogous relationship with high gods. Impure
castes ”absorb” impurities to preserve the purity of higher castes. Dumont (1970a:28)
argues that the low-status Kallars (historically, Dacoits, but now a dominant caste) identify
“only with the impure gods who occupy a position in the pantheon homologous to their
position in society.” However, the Kallars also worship pure, high gods, but with little
identification. They do so, Dumont argues, simply because these are the gods of the
superior castes they are imitating. The high gods represent the encompassing pole and so
are needed to balance the interior customs associated with the small gods.
Dumont sees the vegetarian-nonvegetarian dichotomy as homologous to a unified caste
system integrated by purity and impurity, the superior principle encompassing the inferior.
To simplify his argument: Kallars rank low in the unified caste system and, therefore, iden-
tify with meat-eating small gods. They accept the superiority of the pure gods but do not
identify with them. Consequently, there are not really two ideological traditions at all, but
one hierarchical system integrated by an ideology of purity and impurity.
The KaikkooLar, and perhaps other left-hand castes as well, do not fit this analysis. As
shown above, KaikkooLars do identify closely with their lineage gods, but they also trace
their origins and identity to Shiva and Murugan. Their belief in small gods cannot be said to
be more important than their identity with Murugan and Shiva. Therefore, the dichotomy
cannot be explained away, as Dumont attempts, by saying that their beliefs are
homologous to their position in society and that one level of their beliefs i s more important
than the other. Instead, it is much simpler to recognize that traditionally, the Dravidian
sacred has had two loci-one within the arena of kinship, and thus more personal, and the
other external to the arena of kinship, and so more general. The general i s considered to be
superior to and of wider significance than the local, but both are important in their con-
texts. The recognition of two loci of the sacred does not require the concept of encom-
passinglencompassedprinciples t o explain contradictions, for the loci are perceived as ex-
isting in different spheres of the cosmos.
Dumont’s argument fails because he argues that Indian caste i s integrated by two con-
tradictory models for behavior, the Brahmanical and the kingly. The priestly encompasses
the kingly because the priest sanctifies the worldly position of the king or dominant caste in
the village. Together the two models integrate the caste system by means of the ideology
of purity/impurity and the manipulation of agrarian power. Accordingly, there is no room
for marginal castes in Dumont’s model, except insofar as they are integrated under the
Brahmanical or kingly models. As we have seen, however, the KaikkooLars as weavers and
merchants are economically and ritually marginal to these traditions and have a distinctive
ideological tradition.
We have always assumed that artisan-merchantswere essentially a powerless segment of
Indian society because in the small village shop or in the rural market they are relatively

482 american ethnologist

poor and powerless. What we have rarely seen i s that being small has not necessarily meant
being dominated by, or interdependent with, the landed castes. Only occasionally have we
seen that in historic times, artisan-merchants may have been a locus of power with freedom
of movement. I am arguing that mercantilism is a distinct source of economic power in
both ancient and contemporary Indian society. Artisans, such as weavers, have been able
to tap this power to a degree sufficient to allow them a measure of separateness and
distinctiveness from the social order of the agrarian village, with its priestly/kingly roles.
The structural marginality of the KaikkooLars has become less pronounced with the
disappearance of the left-handiright-hand distinction and the modification of landowner
dominance in the economically diversified modern Indian state. But the effects of this
marginality are s t i l l readily apparent in the form of KaikkooLar residential homogeneity
and exclusiveness, and in what Moffatt (1979:72)describes as their nondominance and non-
agricultural occupation. They are a relatively high caste, often ranked next t o the dominant
landowners, yet they have none of the expected attributes of power their status would sug-
gest. KaikkooLar beliefs about the sacred also reflect, and are allowed by, this marginality
because they are dichotomous rather than unified. The simplest explanation of the Kaik-
koolar’s social position is that they are structurally marginal to the agriculturally based
castes. The marginality of mercantilism enables their classification outside both the land-
owner-dominated system and the priestly dominated system as part of a third, loosely
allied group of left-hand castes.

notes

Acknowledgments. Fieldwork on which this paper is based was conducted from September 1978 t o
August 1979, funded by the American Institute of India Studies. The author wishes t o thank Donald E.
Brown and David Brokensha for their helpful readings of an earlier version of this paper.
’ M y elderly informant, a KaikkooLar, clearly does not know all of the right-hand castes and men-
tions only the main ones; his l i s t of left-hand castes i s also vague with respect to Chettiars, since there
are several kinds. It i s worth noting that the division of barbers into two sections continues t o some ex-
tent in the Erode region. The two groups still distinguish between themselves.
* The error in Heesterman’s logic i s that while Brahmans are ritually ranked high, they are none-
theless involved in interdependent economic relationships as priests. Consequently, they remain
dependent on landowners.
This battle i s annually dramatized in Ammapet‘s streets by KaikkooLars, following Deepavali.
’ It has been suggested that j a t i mobility among artisan-merchant castes is easier precisely because
of their independence from specific patrons. An untouchable past (see Pocock 1962:85) might not be
incompatible with their present status were it not for their participation in the Srirangam temple and
their extensive caste organization. ”Dangerously ambiguous” i s a better assessment of their status,
since they are so unlike landowner-dominated untouchables.

references cited
Appadurai. Arjun
1974 Right and Left Hand Castes in South India. Indian Economic and Social History Review
111216-259.
Arokiaswami, M .
1956 The Konku Country. Madras. University of Madras.
Beck, Brenda E. G.
1970 The Right-Left Division of South Indian Society Journal of Asian Studies 29:779-798.
1972 Peasant Society in Konku. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press
Buchanan, Francis
1807 A Journey from Madras through the Countries of Mysore, CaQara, and Malabar. 3 vols.
London: W. Bulmer and Co.
Census of India
1961 Temples of Madras State. Coimbatore and Salem. Vol. 9, Part 11-D. Government publica-
tion.

models of caste 483

Clothey, Fred W.
1978 The Many Faces of Murugan. The Hague: Mouton.
David, Kenneth
1974 And Never the Twain Shall Meet? Mediating the Structural Approaches to Caste Ranking.
In Structural Approaches to South India Studies. Harry M. Buck and Glenn E. Yocum, eds. pp.
43-80. Chambersburg, PA: Wilson Books.
Dumont, Louis
1970a A Structural Definition of a Folk Deity of Tamil Nad: Aiyanar, the Lord In Religion, Poli-
tics and History in India. Louis Dumont, ed. pp. 20-32. The Hague: Mouton.
1970b Homo Hierarchicus: An Essay on the Caste System. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Frykenberg, R. E.
1977 Persoectives on Social Transformation in South India. Paper presented at the 29th Annual
Meeting of the Association for Asian Studies, New York City.
Hart, George L., Ill
1975 Ancient Tamil Literature: I t s Scholarly Past and Future. In Essays on South India. Asian
Studies at Hawaii, No. 15. Burton Stein, ed. pp. 41-63. Honolulu: The University Press of Hawaii.
Heesterman, J C.
1973 India and the Inner Conflict of Tradition Daedalus 102:97-713
Marriott, McKim
1959 Interactional and Attributional Theories of Caste Ranking. Man in India 39:92-107.
1968 Caste Ranking and Food Transactions: A Matrix Analysis. In Structure and Change in
Indian Society. Milton Singer and Bernard Cohn, eds. pp. 133-171. Chicago: Aldine.
Mayer, Adrian C.
1970 Caste and Kinship in Central India. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Moffatt. Michael
1979 An Untouchable Community in South India: Structure and Consensus. Princeton: Princeton
University Press.
Needham, Rodney
1973 Right and Left: Essays on Dual Symbolic Classification Chicago: University of Chicago
Press.
Pocock, David F.
1962 Notes on Jajmani Relationships. Contributions to Indian Sociology 6:78-95.
Stein, Burton
1968 Social Mobility and Medieval South Indian Hindu Sects. In Social Mobility in the Caste
System in India. Comparative Studies in Society and History, Supplement 3. James Silverberg, ed.
pp. 78-95. The Hague: Mouton.
1975 The State and the Agrarian Order in Medieval South India: A Historiographical Critique.
In Essays on South India. Asian Studies at Hawaii, No. 15. Burton Stein, ed. pp. 64-92. Honolulu:
The University Press of Hawaii.
1980 Peasant State and Society in Medieval South India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Thurston, Edgar
1909 Castes and Tribes of Southern India, 7 vols. Madras: Government Press.
Turner, Victor W.
1969 Liminality and Communitas. In The Ritual Process. Victor W. Turner, ed. pp. 94-130.
Chicago: Aldine.
1974 Passages, Margins and Poverty: Religious Symbols of Communitas. In Dramas, Fields and
Metaphors. Victor W. Turner. ed. pp. 231-271. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

Submitted 19 September 1980

Revised version received 1 7 March 1981
Accepted 6 April 1981

484 american ethnologist