Social Stratification in Jaffna: A Survey of Recent Research on Caste

Sociology Compass 8/1 (2014): 78–88, 10.1111/soc4.12101

Social Stratification in Jaffna: A Survey of RecentResearch on Caste

Prashanth Kuganathan*Teachers College, Columbia University

AbstractSince 1983, war has dominated the perception of Sri Lanka. This has affected scholarship on the coun-try, such that the subjects of an overwhelming number of research proposals and publications havebeen on the war and the prospects and prescriptions for peace. This survey paper is an attempt to lo-cate the system of caste in transition in the Jaffna Peninsula by reviewing recent literature written afterthe commencement of the war. While detailed ethnographies of caste in Jaffna may have temporarilycome to a halt, caste practices have not and remain a salient part of everyday life among the Tamils inSri Lanka. As the war ended in 2009, it is therefore important that social scientists on Sri Lanka revisitthe topic of caste, that is an integral part of not just Tamil culture or society, but being Tamil itself. Asthe study of caste is dominated by research in India, a microanalysis of Jaffna and Sri Lanka, particularlythe nuances of this system in transition due to war and militancy, could contribute to the macro-studyof caste at a sub-continental perspective.

Introduction

Two thousand and nine was a watershed year in Sri Lankan history. In May of that year, theSri Lankan Armed Forces, under the command of President Mahinda Rajapaksa, successfullyannihilated the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) – simultaneously killing its leader,Velupillai Prabhakaran (1954–2009). Prabhakaran had spearheaded a rebel movement for anindependent Tamil homeland in the northern and eastern parts of the island against the SriLankan state for over a quarter of a century. During this time period, Sri Lanka and waressentially became synonymous, with war dominating both the internal and externalconceptions and perceptions of the country.A core structure in transition has been that of caste boundaries and identity. Over 25 years

of war and militancy have altered systems of kinship and social formation, as well astransformed conceptions of nationalism and shifted allegiances in Sri Lanka, particularly inthe conflict-affected north and east. The mechanisms of war and militancy have been ableto alter, even for a short period of time, who one may marry, who they associate with,how they choose to identify, and how they may subdue the innately inherent elementof caste.This survey paper is an attempt to locate the system of caste in a post-war environment in

the Jaffna Peninsula, known to be the most caste conscious and conservative region in thecountry (Pfaffenberger 1994, p. 162). As this journal is concerned primarily with recentliterature, this article will only discuss caste research concerning Jaffna published after thecommencement of the war. However, in order for non-specialized readers to grasp acomplete historical understanding of caste in Jaffna, it is important for them to also look atArasaratnam 1981, Banks 1971(1960), Casie Chitty 2004(1934), David 1972, Pfaffenberger1981, Pfaffenberger 1982, Raghavan 1971, and Skjønsberg 1982.

© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Recent Research on Social Structure in Jaffna 79

The politics of naming the oppressed and a brief descriptionof some castes in Jaffna

It is important to mention that in Sri Lanka, there is no unanimous consensus on the name orterm by which to collectively refer to the various castes formerly known as untouchable, a termof condescendence, that cuts right to the core of one’s dignity. Various works have used avariety of terms over a period of over 50 years. Michael Banks (1971[1960]) uses “Untouchable”(with a capital letter “U”). Kenneth David (1972) uses the Tamil term “korenja cati,” whichliterally translates to low caste (p. 66) or diminutive caste, a term just as condescending as untouchable.While Bryan Pfaffenberger (1981; 1982; 1994) also uses “Untouchable,” he uses the term“Minority Tamil” as well. The term “Minority Tamil” expresses the fact that Tamils from castesconsidered untouchable constituted the minority in Sri Lankan Tamil society. As this termpredates Sri Lanka’s contemporary ethnic and political strife, the term “Minority Tamil” todaymay easily be conflated for Tamils in general, including those considered upper caste, who occupya subaltern status vis-à-vis the Sinhalese majority of whom some perpetuated anti-Tamil violence,sometimes condoned and at other times coordinated by the Sri Lankan post-colonial state and itsanti-Tamil policies.Raghavan (1971) uses the at.imai/kut.imai

1 dichotomy to divide Jaffna Tamil society(pp. 166–167). These terms, however, do not refer collectively to castes that have previouslyfaced untouchability. At.imai and kut.imai refer to two categories of collective caste groupsemployed by the Vell..āl.ar

2 caste, the largest and most dominant caste group in the peninsula,comprising over 50 percent of the total population (Banks 1960, p. 67). The Vell..āl.ars arelandowning agriculturalists by traditional caste occupation. Raghavan (1971) describes theat.imai, who are also known as kut.imakkal, as castes “attached” to the Vell..āl.ar, as they weretheir former slaves (p. 167). The at.imai are comprised of the Kōviyar (domestic servantsspecifically to the Vell..āl.ar), the Nal.avar (toddy tappers and tree climbers), and the Pall..ar(agricultural laborers) castes. The kut.imai, on the other hand, were not private slaves to anyfamily and served society in general. The kut.imai are comprised of the artisan Goldsmith,Blacksmith, Brazier, stone-mason, the Ampatt..ar (barbers), the Van.n. ār (dhobis), and the Par-aiyar(funeral drummers) castes. Only the Ampatt..ar, the Nal.avar, the Pall..ar, and the Par-aiyar casteswere formerly considered untouchable in Sri Lankan Tamil society (Silva et al. 2009, p. 56). Asthey are split between both the at.imai and kut.imai groups, both of these terms do notspecifically imply untouchability. The at.imai category may undergo some sense of subjugation,but this is definitely minimal in comparison to the kut.imai category, particularly with the artisancastes, which are considered intermediary in status and not low.Pañcamar is a term used to collectively refer to the five castes of Van. n. ār, Ampatt..ar, Nal.avar,

Pall..ar, and Par-aiyar. While it may not be widely used as a term of self-identification, Jeyarajah(2001) uses it in his writing and self-identifies as Pañcamar (personal communication,November 14, 2011). I use this term in this paper, as it has been used in Sri Lankanscholarship on caste (Jeyarajah, 2001; Silva et al. 2009); it has a sense of locality and isconsidered an inoffensive and somewhat neutral word to refer to the five castes formerlyconsidered “low” in Jaffna society. “Otukkappatt..avarkal.” or “otukkappatt..a camukam,” bothof which loosely translate to “those who have been set apart,”3 has been used in Jaffna byanti-caste activists in the past and the present to refer to these groups. These terms, however,were used by members of the Eelam People’s Revolutionary Liberation Front (EPRLF); asthey were a paramilitary group, some feel otukkappatt..avarka or otukkappatt..a camukam to havepolitical connotation or implication. In this paper, therefore in addition to the use ofPañcamar, I also adopt the term “depressed castes,” which Silva et al. 2009 use, and“oppressed castes,” both of which are similar to otukkappatt..avarkal..

Sociology Compass 8/1 (2014): 78–88, 10.1111/soc4.12101© 2014 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

80 Recent Research on Social Structure in Jaffna

Today in India, Ambedkar’s termDalit has become the approved and accepted appellation,most importantly, by the members of these traditionally marginalized and oppressed groupsthemselves, as well as the normative term of reference used by national and internationalscholars. The Puducherry based activist and politician Ravikumar (2002) uses the term “Dalit”when referring to these groups in Sri Lanka, which may be somewhat problematic as it is ap-propriative, since most of these groups do not use it as a label of self-identification. This newname is rarely used in Sri Lanka (Silva et al. 2009, p. v); however, in a recent field visit to Jaffnain the summer of 2013, I noticed its usage was on the rise, particularly by certain political el-ements that were mobilizing. The term Dalit then becomes an important term, perhaps notlocally, but in forging certain sub-continental political alliances with other entities acrossthe Palk Strait, who have undergone similar experiences of oppression and are better orga-nized. It also facilitates for comparative academic study and discourse – so while I am carefulto limit my use of the wordDalit, I do not necessarily shy away from it in the pages that follow.

The colonial period

While the system of caste is derived from ancient Hindu texts such as the Purus.asūkta4 and

thus sanctioned by religion, caste as it is perceived today has undergone evolutionary changesover time, just as the progress of the term Dalit itself. It is important to comprehend thenuanced influence the colonial period in particular has had on the perceptions and livedrealities of contemporary caste manifestation. In his article “Caste as a social category andidentity in colonial Lanka,” John Rogers (2004) mentions that caste was viewed by colonialadministrators as “prejudices of the people,” which led to the argument for its official non-recognition and eventual policy of repudiation (p. 63). He goes on to explain that this policycountered that of the administrators in neighboring India, where caste was not only used forenumeration purposes but also exacerbated by the regime (p. 64). Historical anthropologistssuch as Bernard Cohn, Susan Bayly, and Nicholas Dirks have argued that processes under-taken by colonial officials in regard to the collection of caste-specific data and ranking havein fact idealized and solidified the conception of caste as it is known today in India (Bayly1999, p. 4; Cohn 1990[1987], p. 248; Dirks 2001, pp. 8–9). Rogers (2004), however, high-lights the fact that from the time of the inception of the modern census in Ceylon in 1871,no census has collected caste specific data (p. 72). In contrast, India has been able to harnessthis widely available data and apply it to constructive policies, such as reservations for Sched-uled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. While the constitution of Sri Lanka outlaws caste-baseddiscrimination (Silva et al. 2009, p. 15), no progressive caste based legislation has beenimplemented to directly uplift or empower depressed castes.In a similar train of thought, B. E. S. J. Bastiampillai (1988) has argued in his article, “Caste in

Northern Sri Lanka and British Colonial Administrative Practice in the Mid 19th Century:Compromise and Expediency,” that the British played a crucial role in eliminating caste as anofficial category of inhabitant classification from 1845 (p. 50). Paradoxically, it was during thiscolonial period that “the dominant caste was even strengthened and made use of by the Britishcolonial power” (p. 48), which points to Vell..āl.ar domination in intra-Tamil community affairs,and Tamil domination in inter-ethnic affairs – largely due to colonial policies of divide and rule.Interesting are his observations in regard to caste and Christianity. While overt caste distinctionswere eliminated through the colonial government, the Sri Lanka National Archives find thatthe Government Agent did not intervene in the late 1850s when two caste groups of RomanCatholics argued over the burial of their dead, stating “nowish on the part of the government to



interfere with native customs…” (Bastiampillai 1988, p. 51). The church also seemed toexercise minimal protest over discrimination against students from oppressed backgrounds bythose considered upper caste, possibly due to the repercussions missionaries would face had theyupset or alienated the dominantVell..āl.ar community. Bastiampillai (1988) writes of a pupil of theVan. n. ār caste who had to be withdrawn from aWesleyanMethodist school due to opposition ofhis enrollment by those considered upper caste (p. 53). Similarly, he also writes of students con-sidered upper caste who dropped out of a Wesleyan school when a student from the Nal.avarcaste was admitted. Despite the introduction of western notions of egalitarianism through thehigh level of education prevalent in the peninsula, adherence to caste distinction was rigidly up-held (p. 51).While it was the belief of the state that universal, free education would extirpate casteinequality (Silva et al. 2009, p. 15), Bastiampillai (1988) argues that neither education nor conver-sion to Christianity could eradicate caste prejudice among Tamils (p. 58).A subaltern perspective on how Pañcamars were treated by Vell..āl.ars and Christian

missionaries has come from Benjamin Jeyarajah,5 a pastor with the Church of the AmericanCeylon Mission (CACM) in Jaffna. Jeyarajah (2001) argues that the Church, specifically theAmerican Missionaries, not only adopted caste practices but propelled them into continuityby perpetuating favoritism of the Vell..āl.ar (p. 20). While he acknowledges that educationdid not reach oppressed caste communities until the entrance of the Christian missionaries(p. 12), he argues that the American Missionaries primarily educated people considered uppercaste (p. 30). Furthermore, he claims that children from oppressed caste communities were stillsubject to humiliation and indignity, some having to sit shirtless at the back of class-rooms (p. 12). His theological argument is that throughout history, the church has neverstood in solidarity with “these marginalized people for their development including theirspiritual growth” (p. 2) and that the Church needs to follow the gospel that itself preaches(p. 41) and not sanction caste distinction, particularly caste discrimination in the church.The element of caste was inherently woven into the fabric of Tamil culture that evenChristian missionaries could not extract it from their converts.One cannot, however, blame the missionaries entirely for an element that is inherent in

Tamil culture. The Pañcamars may have overestimated the powers of missionaries. It isimportant to point out that the hierarchy of the Church of South India (CSI) to whichthe Jaffna Diocese belongs to, was, and continues to be Vell..āl.ar dominated. It was somewhatinevitable for the missionaries to favor the Vell..āl.ars dominated the political and social realmsof Jaffna life, alienating them could indeed have threatened the stability of missionary activity.It is no surprise the Vell..āl.ars would definitely have numerically dominated the schools due totheir proportion of population in Jaffna and their influence in society. However, despiteJeyarajah’s argument that students primarily considered upper caste went to these Christianschools, many Pañcamars, including Jeyarajah himself, patronized these institutions in Jaffnafollowing the 19th century and are also the products of a western missionary education.

Temple Entry

The 1960s saw some change in regard to caste discriminatory policy, particularly in the Hindureligious arena, where caste originally stemmed from and was practiced most conservatively.In his article “The political construction of defensive nationalism: The 1968 temple entrycrisis in Sri Lanka,” Pfaffenberger (1994) argues that the caste agitations and riots atMaviddapuram, one of Jaffna’s most sacred shrines, were not only a victory in regard to castediscrimination but also a “stepping-stone on the path to the creation of a decidedly modern SriLankan Tamil identity” (p. 162). He gives the reader a brief overview of some discriminatoryrestrictions imposed upon oppressed castes by the Vell..āl.ars:



In Jaffna in the 1940s and 1950s, for instance, Minority Tamils were forbidden to enter or live neartemples; to draw water from the wells of high caste families; to enter laundries, barber shops, cafes, ortaxis; to keep women in seclusion and protect them by enacting domestic rituals; to wear shoes; to siton bus seats; to register their names properly so that social benefits could be obtained; to attendschool; to cover the upper part of the body; to wear gold earrings; if a male, to cut one’s hair; touse umbrellas; to own a bicycle or car; to cremate the dead; or to convert to Christianity orBuddhism. To enforce these sumptuary restrictions extra legally, Vellalars have been ready to fieldgangs of thugs to punish upwardly mobile Pallars or Nalavars. Such gangs pollute Untouchable wellswith dead dogs, fecal matter, or garbage; burn down Untouchable fences or houses; physically assaultand beat Minority Tamils; and sometimes kill them. Preceding the Maviddapuram crisis were severalaltercations in which Minority Tamils had died (p. 148).

Pfaffenberger (1994) states that the 1968 Vell..āl.ar violence against oppressed caste groups thatwere engaged in Gandhian satyāgraha or peaceful protests proved and exposed Jaffna to be “themost caste-conscious and conservative region of the island country” (p. 143). This fact would beused by Sinhala politicians and parties (pp. 159–162) to undermine Vell..āl.ar dominated attemptsat Tamil nationhood (Pfaffenberger 1981). The protest at Maviddapuram proved thatsomething similar to Dalit mass mobilization in India was indeed possible in Jaffna and couldhave influence on the public and policy. After the protests ended, temple doors all over thepeninsula were gradually opened to oppressed castes, with the Government Agent promis-ing to intervene on behalf of them “to put more teeth into the Prevention of SocialDisabilities Act” (Pfaffenberger 1994, p. 162). Pfaffenberger (1994) found, however, thattemple entry to depressed castes still sparked scuffles in the 1970s, with a caste riot in1973 being a major example (p. 162). He concludes by pointing out that it was militantgroups such as the LTTE that have been committed to the abolition of caste, which hadbeen given overwhelming support from all cross-sections of Jaffna society. “But the unitythat has been achieved is founded in terror and wedded to an antidemocratic ethos…,” hecomments (p. 164).

Militancy

Likewise, Dagmar Hellmann-Rajanayagam (1993) also looks at the LTTE in her article “TheJaffna Social System: Continuity and Change under Conditions of War,” focusing on theevolving influential role of the Karaiyār (fishermen) caste during the period of war, and howthey modified the notion that the Vell..āl.ar caste constituted the ideal Tamil (pp. 251–270).While she argues the military prowess and anti-caste social policy of the LTTE played thekey role, she also points to pre-war facts of Karaiyār contestation of Vell..āl.ar hegemony, suchas early conversions to Catholicism to evade caste obligations (p. 268) and a significant numberofKaraiyārs taking advantage of education (p. 270), similar to theVell..āl.ars. As theKaraiyārs oftenclaim a ksatriya (ruler) lineage (David 1972, p. 261), it is pertinent that Hellmann-Rajanayagam(1993) recounts their history in taking the lead in the revolt against foreign occupation (p. 267)and points out their contemporary battle against the state as warriors, “protectors, but also tosome extent, rulers of the people,” culminating in a possible “Kshatriyaization” of their caste(p. 278). She argues that this goes against the “slowly, slowly become Vellalar” proverb,6 sincenon-Vell..āl.ar castes nowadays “demand respect and equality in their own right” (p. 281). Thisaphorism, however, may never have applied to the Karaiyār to begin with, as David (1972)has shown that the Karaiyār have a long history in contesting Vell..āl.ar hegemony and assertingtheir distinctiveness. Hellmann-Rajanayagam (1993) also points out that allegiance toantiquated caste solidarity has shifted to a contemporary one based on ethnicity (p. 280); while



caste hierarchies still exist, these hierarchies fade into the background as distinctions with theethnic other are increasingly and boldly contrasted at the forefront. This is what Kalinga TudorSilva (2000[1999]) argues in his article “Caste, Ethnicity and Problems of National Identity inSri Lanka,” when he says the primary identity of individuals in Sri Lanka has shifted from casteto ethnicity (p. 201) largely due tomilitant movements like the LTTE and the Sinhala-BuddhistJanatha Vimukti Peramuna (JVP), which both fostered ideologies of ethno-nationalism whilesimultaneously trying to eliminate hierarchies of caste and class.In contrast, Indian Dalit rights activist and politician Ravikumar (2002) in his provocative

article, “Caste of the Tiger,” has argued that Dalit rights have taken a back seat at the expenseof Tamil nationhood and that any assertive writing for the rights of Pañcamars was seen astraitorous to the Tamil cause, despite the number of LTTE cadres from depressed castebackgrounds. Ravikumar has given the reader a historical narrative of how Vell..āl.ar-dominatedparliamentary politics failed to address the plight of the Pañcamars, if not going directly againsttheir interests, and has also highlighted some discriminatory restrictions and atrocitiescommitted against them. He adduces the particularly disturbing words of celebrated Jaffna ŚaivaHindu tradition reformer Arumuga Navalar (1822–1879),7 who stated that the Par-ai[yar], thewoman, and the Pañcamar were “all born to be beaten” (para. 5). Ravikumar clearly conveysthe normative casteist undertone inherent in the nature of Sri Lankan Tamil culture. As thiswas written during a time of ceasefire between the LTTE and the Sri Lankan government,Ravikumar argued that the LTTEmust clearly articulate a policy that guarantees and safeguardsthe rights of Pañcamar citizens.

Sinhalese connections and recent Jaffna case studies

M. M. M. Mahroof (2000), however, has made the argument in his paper, “A Conspectus ofTamil Caste Systems in Sri Lanka: Away from a Parataxis,” that militancy and “exteriorisation”of depressed castes, such as migration, may “soften caste deprivations,” causing the Vell..āl.ars torethink their rank in relation to other castes (p. 56).Mahroof gives the reader a general summaryof the features of the Tamil caste systems on the island and an explanation as to how theVell..āl.arswere able to become the most dominant and powerful, by patronizing the educationalinstitutions founded by American and British missionaries and mastering English, which createda dichotomy between elite and common (pp. 47–48). He points out that the 1956 SocialDisabilities Act would have been more effective if it had been coupled with a system ofreservations or quotas for depressed castes in educational institutions and governmentemployment (p. 55), as they have in India. As Mahroof is a researcher of caste in Sinhala society,he makes useful comparisons between the Tamil and Sinhala systems (p. 43), namely

1 The Tamil systems are based on notions of pollution, whereas the Sinhala systems are not.2 The Tamil systems are a part of or supplemental to Hinduism, whereas the Sinhala

systems are not related to Buddhism, which is theologically free of caste.3 Non-Govi8 castes in the Sinhala systems are often wealthy with power; non-Vell..āl.ar

castes in the Tamil systems too often are not.4 The Govi negation of non-Govi is silent and subtle, whereas the Vell..āl.ar negation of

non-Vell..āl.ar is often overt and can be offensive.

Also looking at other Sri Lankan caste systems in addition to Jaffna, Editors Kalinga TudorSilva, P. P. Sivapragasam, and Paramsothy Thanges (2009) inCasteless or Caste-blind? Dynamicsof Concealed Caste Discrimination, Social Exclusion and Protest in Sri Lanka have attempted tosituate caste in its present context in various Sinhalese and Tamil communities, including astudy on caste discrimination in war-affected Jaffna society and a field study on camps for



internally displaced persons (IDPs). Given the security restrictions and inaccessibility of campsto researchers, this paper has introduced some rare and usually unobtainable data, such as thecaste composition of camp inhabitants. While this paper focused specifically on Mallakam in2007, the conclusions and reasoning drawn by the researchers give us an indication of campcomposition and similar social situations of IDPs held in more recent facilities established bythe state at the end of the war in 2009. Thanges and Silva found that a disproportionatenumber of IDPs came from theNal.avar, Pall..āl.ar, and Par-aiyar castes (p. 70), due to the fact thatmany of them had no homes to return to (p. 65). Because many of these castes were bound innature to the Vell..āl.ars (David 1972), they had no capacity or resources to purchase their ownland. Many bounded subordinates depended on their superordinates for their livelihoods,which they may have lost with the vast exodus of Vell..āl.ars from the peninsula. M. Siddartanhas found that over one million people have left the Northern Province since the 1980s, witha disproportionate number of them being Vell..āl.ars who have taken advantage of extendedsocial networks in Colombo and abroad (Silva et al. 2009, p. 64). Silva et al. (2009) pointout that the Vell..āl.ars who have remained in the peninsula are usually able to afford to stayoutside the camps and avoid the stigma of camp habitation (p. 71). Camp inmates fromoppressed castes have difficulty worshipping in local temples (pp. 72–73) and obtainingdrinking water from wells (pp. 73–74). They also mentioned the issues oppressed castes facein regard to purchasing land, due to objections from potential neighbors (p. 71). Prior tothe war, there was a strict code among kinsmen, especially the Vell..āl.ars, in regard to landcontrol, where one would only sell one’s land to another of the same caste (p. 74). If a personfrom a caste considered inferior were somehow able to secure property in a supposedly uppercaste hamlet, they would most likely have to make an offer above the market price (p. 75).While this structure was somewhat altered during wartime, due to both militant anti-castepolicy and the desperation of emigrating owners to sell and liquidate, it was still largelyprevalent and a hindrance to many Pañcamars who remained in Jaffna.One can see that even as displaced Tamils during a time of ethnic conflict, depressed caste

persons received little sympathy from other Tamils belonging to privileged castes. This wasnot always the case. Silva et al. (2009) argue that the LTTE placed a ban on caste discrimina-tion and even caste discourse in Tamil society (pp. 55–56) in areas they controlled. Thismerely imposed a veil of silence on the topic. Silva et al. have pointed out, however, that ifpeace were ever to return, caste would most likely reappear on the political and social agendasof various political actors (p. 52). Ultimately, the studies of Silva et al. have unraveled what thelarger parts of Sri Lankan society have intrinsically chosen not to see, acknowledge, or discuss:the incontrovertible practice of caste, ultimately leading to a counterculture of denial that iteven exists. Indeed, on the ground and in the field, one will find a highly prevalent discourseof denial from most people, regardless of ethnic group or region, that there is caste-basedoppression in Sri Lanka. The mere discussion of caste is taboo. Particularly disturbing arethe institutional efforts that go into caste censorship; Silva et al. report that the University ofJaffna, for example, discourages any research on caste (p. 20).Some foreign scholars, however, have pursued caste-based research. Delon Madavan

(2011) spent the summer in 2005 during the ceasefire studying social relations in Jaffna,focusing specifically on religion and caste. His study was particularly focused within the citylimits of Jaffna Municipal Council where he interviewed 45 residents about their opinionson caste, love, and marriage. Madavan argues that the LTTE’s policy on abolishing castesignificantly transformed Jaffna society due to “the fear it inspired [in] people,” finding thatmany Vell..āl.ars viewed the LTTE and this policy as an attempt to weaken their dominant casteposition in Jaffna society (p. 3). Even though the LTTE lost its control over Jaffna in 1995,Madavan shows that the after effects of their policy continued 10 years later when he did


Figure 1 Perception by inhabitants of castes localization in Jaffna Municipal Council.


his field research in 2005. He finds that overt acts of caste discrimination present in the 1980swere no longer prevalent (p. 3; p. 18). From the depressed castes, Madavan argues in particularthat many members of the Nal.avar caste have successfully elevated their class status byconverting to Christianity, giving up their traditional occupations, and taking advantage ofeducational opportunities (p. 11). He also finds that they received a significant amount of finan-cial remittances from kin, as did the Vell..āl.ars (p. 19). The Pall..ar and Par-aiyar castes, on the otherhand, did not have the same success as the Nal.avar in mobilizing (p. 11; p. 19). The success of acaste elevating its status included the purchase of land in traditional Vell..āl.ar dominated areas – aprocess he calls desegregation – much to the opposition of Vell..āl.ars (p. 20). The most valuablecontributionMadavan makes is a map he constructs, locating the major composition of each castegroup living within each of Jaffna Municipal Council’s 23 districts (p. 9), which he constructedhimself with the input of 15 of his interviewees (Figure 1). The primary maintenance of castepractice is through endogamy, with inter-caste couples having to leave conservative Jaffna if theywish to marry and not be ostracized by their communities (p. 19). His prediction is that caste willslowly dissipate, especially due to the changing notions of the younger generation. Furtherresearch and time, more importantly, will be able to tell if his hypothesis will prove true.

Conclusion

This brief survey of the available research on caste in Jaffna since the commencement of thewar has shown (that)

1 War, militancy, and migration have had a direct influence on how caste has beenpracticed in Jaffna. Almost all the literature reviewed expressed Vell..āl.ar domination priorto militancy. As Hellmann-Rajanayagam (1993) has indicated, the LTTE and their Karaiyārleadership broke this domination, silencing and veiling caste difference in order tostrengthen Tamil nationalism. This created what Madavan (2011) calls desegregation inregard to residential areas in Jaffna. However, Silva et al. (2009) found that acts of castediscrimination were perpetuated in spaces such as IDP camps during the war andpossibly after.



2 While caste is practiced at some level or another in Sri Lanka, including within Sinhalesecommunities, it is still most strongly emphasized in Tamil communities. Mahroof (2000) givesus an inter-ethnic perspective, providing a brief comparison between Sinhalese and Tamilcaste systems, while Hellmann-Rajanayagam (1993), Pfaffenberger (1994), and Ravikumar(2002) give us the often silenced intra-community perspective of the contestation of castewithin Tamil nationalism. Arasaratnam (1981) and Jeyarajah (2001) also clearly show that casteaffects Tamil Christians and not just Hindus.3 The evolution of caste from the colonial period in Sri Lanka. Arasaratnam (1981) and

Rogers (2004) articulate the divergence in colonial policy between India and Ceylon;India used caste as an official category of recognition, while Ceylon chose not to do so. Inaddition to Hellmann-Rajanayagam (1993) and Silva (2000[1999]) arguing that the ethnicconflict has solidified identity in Sri Lanka along ethnic as opposed to caste lines, Arasaratnamand Rogers give us another reason as to why there is less intervention by the Sri Lankan statein local caste issues, particularly those of discrimination.

The recent research that was reviewed does not provide an update to the prewar studies oncaste in Jaffna (Banks 1971[1960]; David 1972; Pfaffenberger 1982). These priorethnographies provide descriptions of castes, their traditional occupations, kinship systems,their particular rituals, and their relations with other castes in great detail. Moreover, theydescribe the social structure of Jaffna as being one overly based on purity and pollution.The people of the Jaffna Peninsula, primarily but not limited to the dominant Vell..āl.ar caste,live their daily lives through the lens of what they perceive to be clean and unclean; therituals they perform – both on a daily and occasional basis – and their relations with othercastes, exist to remove various pollutants (tut.akku). None of the recent research looks at thesepractices in detail due to the overshadowing of war and living under military or militant rule.However, pertinent research questions that were deferred due to the onset of the civil war inthe 1980s still yearn to be answered today. More importantly, several new questions havearisen with the defeat of the LTTE and the end of the war in Sri Lanka that demand scholarlyattention. For instance, more research is necessary for understanding

1 Power structure in Jaffna. With the migration of many Vell..āl.ar elite and the socialmobility various caste groups have undergone during war and militancy, it is important todetermine if Vell..āl.ar domination is still in existence in Jaffna or if there are any newdominant caste groups. An updated listing and ranking of caste groups, as provided inDavid 1972, can provide an indication of caste mobility and current social structure. It is alsoessential to numerically or proportionately assess traditional caste occupation vis-à-vis castegroup to analyze whether there was mobility within each particular classification.2 The effects external militarized entities have on the traditional local system, as the

Northern Province is heavily stationed and patrolled primarily by ethnic Sinhalese armedforces and police officers during this postwar period.3 The current state of hierarchically traditional systems of kinship, ritual practice, and inter-caste

interaction for each caste group, which were central to the ethnographies that were written priorto the war.4 If caste practice and discrimination are actually on the rise. With the end of the war, Silva

et al. (2009) predict caste will resurface on the political and social agendas of various actors,which Hellmann-Rajanayagam (1993) shows were veiled and silenced during the reign ofthe LTTE. However, war and militancy eradicated most of the horrendous and humiliatingovert and open acts of caste discrimination, some of which Pfaffenberger (1994) described.There are several nuances that deserve further attention, which one can examine far more



easily than before, now that the war is over and Jaffna is more easily accessible. It is thus im-portant to analyze social structure, power, and domination in Jaffna with the absence of theLTTE, to see if old attitudes and sentiments are resurrected.

Acknowledgement

E. Valentine Daniel, Rachel Fell McDermott, Amarnath Amarasingam, Francesca Bremner,and Joel Lee read various drafts of this paper and provided necessary modifications. DarshanAmbalavanar, Mark Balmforth, Victor D’Avella, Victoria Gross, Kaori Hatsumi, DagmarHellmann-Rajanayagam, Benjamin Jeyarajah, Delon Madavan, John Rogers, and SharikaThiranagama pointed me in the right direction at one point in time or another and/or providedme with versions of their own work for me to read and use.

Short Biography

Prashanth Kuganathan is a doctoral student in Applied Anthropology at Teachers College,Columbia University. He received his MA in South Asian studies from the Graduate Schoolof Arts and Sciences, Columbia University in 2012. This article has been modified forpublication from the literature review chapter of his unpublished MA thesis entitled Borders/Barriers/Boundaries: The Resurrection of Caste Practices in Postwar Jaffna, written under the supervi-sion of Professors E. Valentine Daniel and Rachel Fell McDermott.

Notes

* Correspondence address: Prashanth Kuganathan, Doctoral Student in Applied Anthropology, Teachers College,Columbia University, Box 211, 525W 120th St, New York NY 10027-6696, USA. E-mail: [email protected]

1 Both At.imai and Kut.imai loosely translate to slave or servant. They are, however, viewed as two different categories of ser-vitude varying in degree of ownership or control by the dominant caste. In South India, the kut.imai are known as the right sidecastes, and the at.imai are known as the left side castes (Pfaffenberger 1982, p. 38).2 Vell..āl.ar is spelled in more than one way in academic sources, such as “Vellala” or “Vellalar.”3 Otukkappatt..avar is the singular for otukkappatt..avarkal..4 A hymn in the Rigveda that explains the creation of humanity. When Purus.a makes the ultimate self-sacrifice, thefour hierarchical varn. as or “cosmogonic human social types” emerge from his body: brāhman. a (priest) from his mouth,ks.atriya (ruler) from his arms, vaiśya (commoner) from his thighs, and śūdra (servant) from his feet (Marriott 2002,pp.1–3). While caste is often conflated with varn. a, the lived reality of caste endogamy is actually practiced throughjāti, which Marriott (2002) describes as “one of the many thousands of marriage networks among South Asianfamilies” (p. 1).5 Jeyarajah’s Master of Theology thesis was written in Tamil and completed in May 2001 at the Tamil NaduTheological Seminary. I used a concise English version of his thesis entitled, “History of Sri Lankan ‘Panchamar’ inRelation to C.S.I. Jaffna Diocese During the Period 1973–1998.”6 There is a South Indian Tamil proverb that expresses the fusion of the Vell..āl.ar caste. It has a connotation that the castesfusing to become Vell..āl.ar were inferior, as if to imply the Vell..āl.ar caste was the aspired ideal. Arasaratnam (1981) translatesthis as “Kallas, Maravas and Akampadiyas gradually come to be Vellalars” (p. 385). In the original Tamil transliteratedinto English, the proverb is “Kallar, Maravar, Kan-atākampat. iyar mella mella vantu Vell..āl.ar āvār.” The words “mella mella”literally translate to “slowly slowly.”7 For a detailed study on Navalar and his reform movement, see D. N. Ambalavanar (2006). Arumuga Navalar and theconstruction of a Caiva public in colonial Jaffna. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard Divinity School, Harvard University.8 The Govigama, which may be spelled in a variety of ways including Goyigama or Goigama, and sometimes knownsimply as Govi, is the dominant Sinhalese caste in Sri Lanka. Also a caste of agrarian landlords, the Govigama caste is oftenviewed as the Sinhala parallel to Tamil Vell..āl.ar caste. Similar to the Vell..āl.ars in the north, the Govigamas in the south alsodominated educational institutions and government jobs.



References

Ambalavanar, D. N. 2006. Arumuga Navalar and the Construction of a Caiva Public in Colonial Jaffna. Ph.D.dissertation, Harvard Divinity School, Harvard University.

Arasaratnam, S. 1981. Social History of a Dominant Caste Society: The Vellalar of North Ceylon (Sri Lanka) in the 18thCentury. The Indian Economic and Social History Review 18(3): 377.

Banks, M. 1971[1960]. Caste in Jaffna. p. 61 in Aspects of Caste in South India, Ceylon, and North-West Pakistan, edited byE. R. Leach. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Bastiampillai, B. E. S. J. 1988. Caste in Northern Sri Lanka and British Colonial Administrative Practice in the mid 19thCentury: Compromise and Expediency. Sri Lanka J.S.S. 11(1 & 2): 47.

Bayly, S. 1999. Caste, Society and Politics in India from the Eighteenth Century to the Modern age. New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Casie Chitty, S. 2004[1934]. Castes, Customs, Manners and Literature of the Tamils. New Delhi: Asian Educational Services.2009. in Casteless or Caste-Blind?: Dynamics of Concealed Caste Discrimination, Social Exclusion, and Protest in Sri Lanka,edited by K. T. Silva, P. P. Sivapragasam, P. Thanges. Copenhagen: International Dalit Solidarity Network.

Cohn, B. S. 1990[1987]. An Anthropologist Among the Historians and Other Essays (2nd impression with corrections. ed.).Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Daniel, E. Valentine. 1984. Fluid Signs: Being a Person the Tamil Way. Berkeley: University of California Press.David, K. A. 1972. The Bound and the Nonbound: Variations in Social and Cultural Structure in Rural Jaffna, Ceylon.Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Chicago.

Dirks, N. B. 2001. Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of Modern India. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Hellmann-Rajanayagam, D. 1993. Jaffna Social System: Continuity and Change Under Conditions of War.Internationales Asienforum 24(3–4): 251.

Jeyarajah, B. 2001. History of Sri Lankan “Panchamar” in Relation to C.S.I. Jaffna Diocese During the Period 1973–1998.Master of Theology Thesis, Tamilnadu Theological Seminary.

Madavan, D. 2011. Socio-Religious Desegregation in an Immediate Postwar Town Jaffna, Sri Lanka.Carnets De Recherches (2).http://www.carnetsdegeographes.org/carnets_recherches/rech_02_04_Madavan_eng.php (Last Accessed 31 July 2013).

Mahroof, M. M. M. 2000. A Conspectus of Tamil Caste Systems in Sri Lanka: Away from a Parataxis. Social Scientist28(11/12): 40–59.

Marriott, M. 2002. Varna and Jati. Unpublished manuscript.Pfaffenberger, B. 1981. The Cultural Dimension of Tamil Separatism in Sri Lanka. Asian Survey 21(11): 1145–1157.Pfaffenberger, B. 1982. Caste in Tamil Culture: The Religious Foundations of Sudra Domination in Tamil Sri Lanka. Syracuse,N.Y.: Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University.

Pfaffenberger, B. 1994. The Political Construction of Defensive Nationalism: The 1968 Temple Entry Crisis in SriLanka. p. 143 in The Sri Lankan Tamils: Ethnicity and Identity, edited by Chelvadurai Manogaran and BryanPfaffenberger Boulder: Westview Press.

Raghavan, M. D. 1971. Tamil Culture in Ceylon; a General Introduction. Colombo: Kalai Nilayam.Ravikumar. 2002. Caste of the Tiger: Eelam and the Dalit Question. http://www.ambedkar.org/News/News080802.htm (Last Accessed 31 July 2013).

Rogers, J. 2004. Caste as a Social Category and Identity in Colonial Lanka. The Indian Economic and Social History Review41(1): 51–77.

Silva, K. T. 2000[1999]. Caste, Ethnicity and Problems of National Identity in Sri Lanka. p. 201 in Nation and NationalIdentity in South Asia. edited by S. L. Sharma and T. K. Oommen. New Delhi: Orient Longman.

Skjønsberg, E. 1982. A Special Caste?: Tamil Women of Sri Lanka. London: Zed Press.


http://www.ambedkar.org/News/News080802.htm

http://www.ambedkar.org/News/News080802.htm

Social Stratification in Jaffna: A Survey of Recent Research on Caste

Documents

Transcript of Social Stratification in Jaffna: A Survey of Recent Research on Caste