¹ Ministry of Labour, Report on the Second Agricultural Labour Enquiry, 1956–57 (New Delhi, 1960). An agricultural labour household is defined as one where the bulk of income in the previous year was derived from agricultural wages. Such households formed 24.7 % of the total rural households. In 1951 the agricultural population was 82 % of the rural population.Google Scholar

² Differences in definition may exaggerate the growth of landless labour, but the fact of this growth is undeniable.

² See, e.g., Mukherjee, R., The Dynamics of a Rural Society (Berlin, 1957);Google ScholarDesai, A. R., ed. The Social Background of Indian Nationalism (Bombay, 1948);Google ScholarDutt, R. Palme, India Today, 2nd Indian ed. (Bombay, 1949);Google ScholarPatel, S. J., Agricultural Labourers in Modern India and Pakistan (Bombay, 1952);Google ScholarChand, Tara, History of the Freedom Movement in India, vol. I (New Delhi, 1960).Google Scholar

⁴ Patel, , op. cit., pp. 32, 63.Google Scholar

⁵ See, e.g., Marx, K. and Engels, F., On Colonialism (Moscow, n.d.), pp. 35–37, 271.Google Scholar

⁶ Work on this census extended from 1867 to 1872, and it was published in 1871–72. It will be referred to here as the 1871 census.

⁷ This was known as the inamdari system.

⁸ For a detailed account of South Indian land tenures, see Baden-Powell, B. H., Land Systems of British India (1892), vol. III;Google Scholar see also Iyengar, S. Sundararaja, Land Tenures in Madras Presidency (Madras, 1916).Google Scholar

⁹ In 1799 a landowner in Chinglepet had 400 slaves; but he could employ only 100 of them, and the remainder worked for other landholders; see Place, Report on the Jaghir (Madras, n.d.), written in 1799, p. 75.Google Scholar In 1835–36 it was reported that a landholder in Tinnevelly had 500 slaves, but apparently he also let them work for others, for want of sufficient land; Report of Indian Law Commissioners on Slavery (1841), p. 20, (hereafter Slavery Report).Google Scholar

¹⁰ This prohibition was not uniformly rigid. The Haiga Brahmins of South Kanara were reported to do every kind of manual labour on their own lands. But this was exceptional. In certain parts of Malabar, on the other hand, Brahmins might not even supervise labour.

¹¹ Domestic slavery did exist in South India at this time, particularly among the Muslims. But it was not widespread. Moreover, it has little bearing on our problem. Since domestic servants could not be untouchable, they had to come from a completely different social group from the agricultural labourers.

¹² For an example of the rights of the pariah see Thurston, E., Castes and Tribes of Southern India, 7 vols. (Madras, 1909).Google Scholar

¹³ The main sources of information about servitude in the various regions are replies sent by the revenue and judicial officials to enquiries about the nature and extent of slavery and serfdom in their districts. There were two such enquiries, one in 1819, the other in 1836. The results are summarised in Parliamentary Papers, House of Commons, no. 125: Slavery in India: Correspondence and Abstracts of Regulations and Proceedings from 1777 (hereafter referred to as Slavery in India, 1828); P.P. 1837–38, House of Commons, no. 697: Slave Trade: Correspondence, Orders and Regulations, and Proceedings Taken Thereon, 1829–38 (hereafter referred to as Slavery in India, 1838); P.P. 1841 (XXVIII), Report of the Indian Law Commissioners on Slavery (hereafter, Report on Slavery, 1841). Another source is the manuscript Proceedings of the Madras Board of Revenue, which is preserved in the Madras Record Office, hereafter referred to as P. B. R.

¹⁴ Buchanan, F., A Journey from Madras through the Countries of Mysore, Carrara and Malabar, 2nd ed. (Madras, 1870), II, p. 67.Google Scholar

¹⁵ The Malayalam word for slave is adima. Cheruman is merely one of the groups included in this generic term. But it was commonly used by the British as synonymous with all agricultural slaves or serfs, whatever their caste. Buchanan is not only confused about the difference between cheruman and adima, but also about the difference between two quite separate labour castes, cheruman and puliyan: “In some parts of the province, cherumar (sc. cheruman) is a term applied to slaves in general, whatever their caste may be; but it is in other parts confined to a peculiar caste, who are also called polian… Even among these wretched creatures, the pride of caste has full influence, and if a cherumar or polian be touched by a slave of the Parian tribe he is defiled, and must wash his head and pray”; op. cit., II, p. 151.

¹⁶ Ibid., II, pp. 67–68.

¹⁷ Graeme, Report on Malabar, 14 Jan. 1822, para. 34 (Slavery in India, 1828, pp. 914–15). The rates of interest etc. for each of these forms of mortgage are also given.

¹⁸ Baden-Powell, , op. cit., III, p. 153.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Buchanan, , op. cit., II, p. 67; Report on Malabar, para. 33. Buchanan adds that the only restriction of the master's powers of sale were that husband and wife might not be sold separately. The children belonged to the master of one of the parents, depending on the marriage customs of the caste.Google Scholar

²⁰ Magistrate, North Malabar, to Government, 31 March, 1812; Slavery in India, 1828, p. 567. Graeme says that a slave might be sold in another taluk (a subdivision of a district) but it had to be contiguous with his own; Report on Malabar, para. 33.

²¹ Ibid., para. 1130. With painer cf. the Tamil caste name pannaiyal.

²² Buchanan, , op. cit. II, p. 68, 154.Google Scholar

²³ P. P. 1831–32, Report from the Select Committee on the Affairs of the East India Company, Appendix K, p. 558, (hereafter Select Committee Report, 1832).

²⁴ Collector, Malabar, to Board of Revenue, 20 July, 1819 (Slavery in India, 1828), p. 846.

²⁵ Cf. the Malayali term pulaiyan.

²⁶ Mogeru is the name of a fisherman caste in Kanara; Sir Baines, Athelstane, Ethnography (Castes and Tribes) (Strasburg 1912).Google Scholar

²⁷ Mari and mera are subdivisions of the holeya caste; Thurston, E., Castes and Tribes of Southern India (7 vols., Madras 1909) II, p. 329.Google Scholar

²⁸ Mundala or bakuda is another subdivision of the holeya, idem.

²⁹ This account has been compiled from Collector, South Kanara, to Board of Revenue, P. B. R., 3 August, 1801: and from his letter of 7 August, 1801, quoted in Slavery Papers, 1828, pp. 549–50.

³⁰ Census Report for Mysore (1901), quoted in Thurston, op. cit., II, p. 335.

³¹ Collector, South Kanara, to Board of Revenue, 10 July, 1819, Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 843.

³² Report on Slavery, 1841, p. 147.

³³ Baden-Powell, , op. cit., III, pp. 111–22;Google ScholarBayley, W. H. and Hudleston, W., Papers on Mirasi Right (Madras, 1892), p. 335.Google Scholar

³⁴ Pannai, a farm; padi, a fixed daily allowance of food; al, a labourer.

³⁵ Collector, Tinnevelly, to Board of Revenue, 30 June, 1819, Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 841; P. B. R. 25 Nov. 1819; Collector, Coimbatore, to Board of Revenue, P. B. R. 24. Jan., 1819.

³⁶ Collector, Trichinopoly, to Board of Revenue, 1 July, 1819, Trichinopoly Records, vol. 3677, p. 153.

³⁷ The correct Tamil word for “slave” is adimai. It may well be that the word was originally used of those who could be transferred separately from the land (although the Tamil Lexicon defines adimai as “a slave formerly attached to the land and transferable with it), while pannaiyal was used of those permanently attached to the land. But if there had ever been such a distinction, by the nineteenth century it had become blurred.

²⁸ Collector, Coimbatore, to Board of Revenue, 24 June, 1819, Slavery Papers, 1828, pp. 836–37.

³⁹ Collector, Trichinopoly to Board of Revenue, 1 July, 1819, ibid., p. 839; Reply of Magistrate, Trchinopoly, 5 Jan. 1836, Report on Slavery, 1841, p. 460.

⁴⁰ Collector, Tinnevelly, to Board of Revenue, 30 June, 1819, Tinnevelly Records, vol. 3596, pp. 331–33; Replies of Assistant Judge, 15 May, 1836, and Joint Magistrate, 21 Dec. 1835, Report on Slavery, 1841, pp. 457–60.

⁴¹ Tanjore Records, vol. 3284, pp. 73–76. Repuly of Judge, Kumbakonam, 20 Jan., 1836, Report on Slavery, 1841, p. 461.

⁴² Reply of Judge, 30 April, 1836, ibid., pp. 455–57.

⁴³ Collector, Chinglepet, to Board of Revenue, 1819, Chinglepet Records, vol. 467, p. 112; Report on Slavery, 1841, Appendix IX.

⁴⁴ Papers on Mirasi Right, pp. 334–36.

⁴⁵ Slavery Papers, 1828, pp. 871–72.

⁴⁶ Buchanan, , op. cit., I, p. 441–42.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Chinglepet Records, vol. 467, p. 111.

⁴⁸ Place, op. cit., para. 75.

⁴⁹ Replies of judicial officers in Telugu districts, Report on Slavery, 1841, Appendix IX, pp. 445–46.

⁵⁰ In the Northern districts slaves were certainly being bought for export. This was mentioned in a warning proclamation by the Governor-General, 8 March, 1819, Godavari Records, vol. 918, pp. 15–18.

⁵¹ Minute of Board of Revenue, 5 Jan. 1818, para. 13, Selections from Papers from the Records at the East-India House (London, 1820) I, p. 887.Google Scholar

⁵² Collector to Board of Revenue, 29 March 1819, P. P. 1831–32, XI, Appendix LXXXIX, pp. 511–12.

⁵³ Report on Slavery, 1841, Appendix IX, p. 444.

⁵⁴ Ibid., pp. 444–46.

⁵⁵ Ibid., p. 115.

⁵⁶ Agricultural servitude was obviously deep-rooted in South Indian society. The complex dealings in human beings that Buchanan saw in 1800 must have developed over a long period of time. There are also references to servitude in temple inscriptions and in the accounts of early foreign travellers. For a description of early forms of agricultural labour, including types of “serfdom”, in the Cola period (flor. first to thirteenth centuries A.D.) in the Tamil areas, see Sastri, K. A. Nilakanta, The Colas (Madras, 1955), pp. 567–70.Google Scholar For Malabar see references in Menon, K. P. Padmanabha, History of Kerala (Ernakulam, 1924)Google Scholar and in Duarte, Barbosa, A Description of the Coasts of East Africa and Malabar, English translation (London, 1866).Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Agricultural labourers could, of course, also have been drawn from other castes. This point is dealt with later.

⁵⁸ Op. cit., vol. II, p. 198. The total population has been calculated on the assumption of 5 people per house, as in Palghat.

⁵⁹ Ibid., II, p. 146.

⁶⁰ Ibid., II, p. 162.

⁶¹ Ibid., II, p. 117.

⁶² Collector, Malabar, to Board of Revenue, 20 July 1819: Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 845.

⁶³ According to H. Bevan, a military officer, there were 100,000 slaves in Wynaad in 1832, but his evidence is probably not as reliable as that of the administrators. Select Committee Report, 1832, Appendix K, p. 577.

⁶⁴ All figures from T. B. Saber's evidence before the Select Committee of the House of Commons of 1832. Mr. Baber had served for 32 years in Bombay, Malabar and Kanara.

⁶⁵ This was disputed by Mr. Brown, manager of a plantation, who held that this figure related to caste and not actual occupation, and included men who cultivated their own land. He also said that the correct census figure was 146,202. Report on Slavery, 1841, p. 127.

⁶⁶ Logan, W., Manual of the Malabar District (1906), I. p. 151.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Principal Collector of Malabar, to Board of Revenue, 24 April, 1838, quoted in Parliamentary Papers Regarding Slavery in the East Indies, 6 04, 1841, p. 93.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ North Kanara was separated from South Kanara and added to Bombay Presidency in 1861 but unless otherwise noted, Kanara stands for South Kanara in this article.

⁶⁹ Buchanan, , op. cit., II pp. 203–204.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ They were described by the Magistrate of Kanara in 1819 as descendants of persons taken in battle, or Brahmin women who had lost caste. Slavery Report, 1841, Appendix IX.

⁷¹ The population of South Kanara in 1800–01 was 396,672; the population of the whole of Kanara in 1807 was 576,640 and 665,652 in 1827.

⁷² Unless otherwise stated, all the figures in this paragraph are from the Report on Slavery, 1841.

⁷³ Collector, South Arcot, to Board of Revenue, 12 Sept., 1819, Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 871.

⁷⁴ Evidence of A. D. Campbell, Select Committee Report, 1832, Appendix K. The population of Tanjore in 1831 was 1,128,730, P. B. R., 4 March, 1833.

⁷⁵ The number of pallan, etc., was 129,520; the population of Tinnevelly in 1822–23 was 788,196, P. B. R., 3 Nov., 1823.

⁷⁶ Collector, Trichinopoly, to Board of Revenue, 1 July, 1819. Trichinopoly Records, vol. 3677, p. 152.

⁷⁷ The caste break-down is very rough: into “Brahmins, Muslims, Soodras, etc.” and “Pallars, Pariahs, etc.”, P. B. R., 21 Feb., 1831.

⁷⁸ Caste figures are also available for Guntur for 1830, but since the breakdown is into “Brahmins, Muslims, Soodras, Pariah”, etc., they cannot be used. P. B. R., 24 Jan., 1831.

⁷⁹ P. B. R., 18 Nov., 1830.

⁸⁰ The Magistrate of South Arcot wrote on 28 Feb., 1836, that agricultural slavery was considerable in his districts, particularly in the two southern taluks bordering Tanjore. Report on Slavery, 1841, pp. 450–51.

⁸¹ See Slavery Papers, 1828, pp. 836–37, and Report on Slavery, 1841, p. 461.

⁸² Slavery Papers, 1828, pp. 873–74.

⁸³ Slavery Papers, 1828, pp. 386–37.

⁸⁴ Collector, Madura, to Board of Revenue, 26 Oct., 1819. Madura Records, vol. 1166, pp. 91–93.

⁸⁵ For the Telugu districts no figures of caste or occupation are available for this period. Even in the twentieth century the depressed castes of Andhra were socially much better off than those on the West Coast or in Taniilnad. See Hutton, J. H., Caste in India, 2nd ed., p. 205.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ There are many references to show that agricultural “slaves” or “serfs” could be drawn only from the agricultural labour castes.

⁸⁷ The following extract from the 1921 Census Report illustrates the difficulties of defining caste: “In the India Census Report of 1911 caste was defined as an ‘endogamous group or collection of groups bearing a common name and having a common traditional occupation, who are so linked together by these and other ties, such as the tradition of a common origin, the possession of the same tutelary deity, and the same social status, ceremonial observations and family priests, that they regard themselves and are regarded by others, as forming a single homogenous community.’ As a rule a caste contains several endogamous groups or sub-castes. It is held by some authorities that each of these groups ought to be regarded as a caste, that the larger body commonly called a caste is merely a collection of true castes who follow the same profession. Be that as it may, the man in the street applies the term caste to the larger group, and this report adopts the same practice. The characteristics of a caste will then be endogamy, commensality, and a common name and common tradition, though intermarriage and commensality seldom extend to the whole caste and are generally restricted to sub-castes or endogamous groups within the caste. The common name is not always a safe guide nor is the common traditional occupation.” 1921 Census Report, pp. 153–54. Unless otherwise mentioned, references are to the Madras Census Reports.

⁸⁸ Census Report, 1901, pp. 172–73.

⁸⁹ Census Report, 1891, p. 245.

⁹⁰ This type of error arose from the fact that each depressed caste would have its own functionaries, for caste reasons again. Thus “each depressed caste (has) its own priests, medicine men, bands, acrobats and orderlies. But in relation to the other castes the general body of depressed caste and its accessory functionnaires form a unit having the same status and subject to the same social distance.” N. S. Reddy, “Transition in Caste Structure in Andhra Desh with Particular Reference to Depressed Classes," unpublished dissertation (1952), pp. 16–17.

⁹¹ Thus pulaiyan is a synonym for cheruman as well as the name of a Tamil caste of hill cultivators found in Madura and Coimbatore, Census Report, 1901, p. 175. Panchama is also a synonym for mala or paraiyan: in 1891 in the Tamil districts the panchama were included in the pariah, but in the Telugu districts were registered as a separate caste. Census Report, 1891, p. 249.

⁹² Census Report, 1901, p. 127.

⁹³ For examples of these and other types of caste formations, see Census Report, 1901, p. 132.

⁹⁴ Also, entire castes or sub-castes could change their names; and it was naturally the lowest castes which actually did so. But the old despised caste names were forsaken for new and (temporarily) more respectable ones on a large scale only in the twentieth century; and in fact this made a significant difference to the census figures only in 1931. In fact “the experience of seven censuses in this State confirms the view that the caste return is one of the most accurate of all the census tables, and is far more reliable than age-statistics for instance, or the return of infirmities or occupation”. Census Report, 1931, vol. 19 (Baroda), p. 393.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 837.

⁹⁶ Baylay, and Hudleston, , op. cit., p. 335.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Census Report, 1881, p. 110. See also Census Report, 1891, p. 246; and Salem Gazetteer, Part I, vol. I, p. 142.

⁹⁸ Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 871. On phonetic grounds, pulley should mean palli, but from conditions in other districts pallan is more likely.

⁹⁹ Census Report, 1871, p. 158.

¹⁰⁰ Census Report, 1911.

¹⁰¹ Between 1871 and 1881 the Hindu population declined by 2.27 %, but the proportionate decline was greater for the pariah. The decline was partly due to the effects of the 1876–78 famine, and partly due to conversion. (Census Report, 1881, p. 115). For some districts, e.g., Malabar, the conversion would be more significant. (Census Report, 1881, p. 115). In some years, the caste figures include converts (e.g., 1881).

¹⁰² Census Report, 1891, p. 246.

¹⁰³ Census Report, 1891, p. 245.

¹⁰⁴ Census Report, 1871, p. 289.

¹⁰⁵ Ibid., p. 252.

¹⁰⁶ Indeed, those who hold that the class was created during the nineteenth century could find support in the fact that castes with other traditional occupations, such as the madiga, or leather-workers, of Andhra as well as the chakkiliyan, or Tamil leather-workers, were also for the most part agricultural labourers in 1901. It is when deciding the significance of such data that the contemporary evidence about the existence of slavery is most useful.

¹⁰⁷ Collector, Salem, to Board of Revenue, 14 June, 1819, Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 836. In Ramnad also the pallan were “employed exclusively in the cultivation of paddy lands”; Ramnad Manual, pp. 36–37.

¹⁰⁸ It is unnecessary to repeat the statements of every official who wrote on the question that the “slaves” could be drawn only from certain castes. The only contradictory statement was made by the Collector of North Arcot on 23 Dec., 1819: “The slaves, though universally I believe pariahs (by which he meant untouchables) cannot be said to be of any particular caste”, which, he added, distinguished them from the slaves in Malabar. Slavery Papers, 1828, pp. 873–74. But all the weight of the evidence is against him, unless perhaps he was referring to debt slavery.

¹⁰⁹ Collector, Malabar, to Board of Revenue; 20 July, 1819; Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 846.

¹¹⁰ P. B. R., 3 Aug., 1801.

¹¹¹ P. B. R., 11 Jan., 1844.

¹¹² Buchanan, , op. cit., II, p. 198.Google Scholar

¹¹³ Collector, Malabar, to Board of Revenue, 20 July, 1819. Slavery Papers, 1828, p. 846.

¹¹⁴ Between 1871 and 1901, the proportion of male agricultural labourers to the male working force varied from 16–18 %; at the beginning of the nineteenth century, according to our calculations, the agricultural labour groups formed from 10–15 % of the total population.