See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/261781910

The Myths of Origin of the Indian Untouchables

Article  in  Man · September 1994

DOI: 10.2307/2804350

CITATIONS READS

0 92

1 author:

Sushrut Jadhav
University College London
84 PUBLICATIONS   1,024 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

5. Exclusion and Self-Exclusion from Supplementary Nutrition Program: Short Ethnographies from Selected Villages of Gujarat”. Funded under PHFI-UKC Wellcome
Trust Capacity Building Programme Research Grants View project

Discrimination, Distress and Higher Education in India View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Sushrut Jadhav on 05 June 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Jadhav, S (1994): Myths about Untouchability in India. Man:
Journal of The Royal Anthropological Institute. September
1994, 29, No 3.

The myths of origin of the Indian untouchables

In his article on the origin myths of Indian untouchables, Robert Deliege (Man (N.S.) 27, 533-

50) suggests that these have some antiquity and are unlikely to be elaborated in the modern

period. Based on personal family knowledge, I would like to mention another myth that

suggests a relatively recent development.

It concerns the caste origins of a family of cobblers in Kundal village, Maharashtra. The

family have no written records of their history, but refer to frequently visiting troubadours

(shahirs) who keep the myth alive through their oral tradition by singing out the story with

accompanying drums and role play.

There were three brothers of the Maratha (warrior) caste who lived on the other

side of the river Hubli [i.e in Karnataka under the present state boundaries] and served in the

durbar of Shivaji [the famous Maratha chieftain described in popular culture as a brave king

who resisted the Mughals]. The brothers took part in the famous "national mutiny" against the

British Raj. As the mutiny was unsuccessful, they fled to escape being caught by British

soldiers. They crossed the river, leaving behind their possessions and land, and arrived with

their wives at this village (Kundal). Penniless and persecuted, they had to `camouflage' their

identity. So they picked up the most readily available occupation and have been cobblers

(chamars) ever since Following his death, the eldest brother was cremated in the vicinity of

their hut; a shrine was built upon his grave which has been worshipped ever since by the

family.

There are several issues of interest here. This relatively recent myth refers to the colonial

context (and to a continuing political resistance) to legitimize the cobblers' inferior status. Their

present position is perceived to be due to pragmatic `force of circumstances', rather than to the
sort of misunderstanding' that characterizes the myths reported by Deliege. This myth

transforms the identity of this family (analogous to Moffatt's code switch) into `freedom

fighters' who follow the tradition of Shivaji, and also simultaneously helps to deny the family's

low caste origins; ascribing its misfortune to the `British' in contrast to other myths that blame

Brahmins or gods for inventing the caste system.

From a psychological perspective, such a projective mechanism might well help to ease

inter-caste tensions, whilst at the same time identifying a common external `aggressor'. Ritual

purity is not a central theme that defines the family's position in the caste hierarchy but one

which is invoked whenever convenient. The shrine in the vicinity of the family's residence

creates and offers a powerful alternative sacred space, a key locus of current resistance to

discrimination (being denied access to the village temple and school). Beef remains forbidden

and the cow is considered sacred in keeping with the general Hindu tradition.

The principle of karma is still embraced, despite the family identifying themselves as

`low caste'. These apparent contradictions do not exist for them and may perhaps be in keeping

with any culture of pluralism where multiple contradictory worlds co-exist as central features of

everyday life. Deliege's claim that such myths are popular because they legitimize an inferior

status is consistent with this myth, although the association of Kundal village with political

resistance against British rule and its reputation as a haven for freedom fighters, particularly for

the Jana Sangh, suggest additional reasons for the shaping, reification and survival of certain

cultural memories.

SUSHRUT JADHAV

Centre for Medical Anthropology

University College London
View publication stats