Patronage and 'Community': The Role of a Tamil 'Village' Festival in the Integration of a Town

Author(s): Geert De Neve

Reviewed work(s):
Source: The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, Vol. 6, No. 3 (Sep., 2000), pp. 501-
519
Published by: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2661088 .
Accessed: 21/05/2012 18:46

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve
and extend access to The Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute.

http://www.jstor.org
 PATRONAGE AND 'COMMUNITY':
THE ROLE OF A TAMIL 'VILLAGE' FESTIVAL
IN THE INTEGRATION OF A TOWN

GEERT DE NEVE
SchoolofAfricanandAsian Studies,University
of Sussex

Focusing on the festivalof 'village' goddessesin two small towns in Tamilnadu,South India,
the article investigateshow the urban organizationof temples and festivalsreflectscharac-
teristicsof the organizationof similarfestivalsin villages,whilst at the same time the 'acts
of patronage'of wealthylocal industrialists increasinglyshape the natureof the 'community'
generated at festivaland other times.Building on idioms of village communityand pre-
colonial kingship models, industrialistsare central to the formationof a sense of com-
munitywhich transcendsthe borders of caste and class. It is argued that the formationof
communityboundaries cannot be understood outside the context of the wider social and
economic relationshipsand, in this case, the labour relationswhich lie at the heart of South
Indian textileindustries.

The studyof South Indian temples,deities,and festivals has focusedon temples

and festivalsin villages or on the role and organizationof worship in large
urban centres(Appadurai1981; Appadurai & Breckenridge1976; Beck 1972;
1981; Breckenridge1976; 1978; Fuller 1984; 1985; 1988; 1996; Good 1985;
Hiltebeitel1991; Mines 1994; Nishimura1987; Reiniche 1979; 1987). Smaller
towns spread across the Tamil countryside,however,have received far less
attentionthan the traditionalvillage or the royal capital in anthropological
research.Good's study(1987) of a Murugantemple in a small town of Sula-
malai (TirunelveliDistrict,Tamilnadu)is one of the few exceptions.However,
these small towns are growingand theirtemplesare oftenpivotal centresof
worship.
This article is based on field work in two medium-sized textile towns,
Bhavani and Kumarapalayam, situatedat the River Cauvery in Tamilnadu.It
will firstbe argued thatthe organizationof the templesand religiousfestivals
in these urban localitiestends to reflectboth the traditionalsocial structure
of the town and the impact of increasingcompetitionfor authorityamong
the wealthiesttextile industrialists.'I will then indicate how these festivals
contributeto the integrationof the localityinto a town-wide 'community'
which stretchesbeyond the boundaries of caste and class. In line with the
argumentput forwardby Dirks (1987), Inden (1990), Price (1989; 1996),-and
othersthat'caste was not the single dominantmetonymand trope of social
difference in pre-colonialIndia' (Dirks 1987: xxii), I will maintainthatneither
C Royal AnthropologicalInstitute2000.
Inst. (N.S.) 6, 501-519
J. Roy.anthrop.
502 GEERT DE NEVE

is it today.Idioms of pre-colonialkingshipresurfaceat the core of the ritual,

economic, and political relationshipswhich currentlyshape life in the small
industrialcentresof Tamilnadu. Focused around the dominance of locally
powerfultextileindustrialists, the sharedwish for a peaceful integrationof a
town-wide communityreflectsboth the big men's search for constituencies
and economic interests, and theirworkers'sense of belonging to a commu-
nitywhich is not merelythat of theircaste,but of a localityformedaround
a protectivegoddess,her temple and her festival. What I will describethere-
foreis not in itselfnew nor is it my intentionto trace continuitiesfromthe
pre- to the post-colonialera.WhatI am suggestingis thatemnicculturalidioms
of kingshipand 'community',which alongsidecaste were constitutiveof pre-
colonial society,continue to shape local South Indian social relationstoday,
even though the settingis no longer a kingdom,but a small and industrial-
ized urban locality.
In a discussion of the recent history of the Sourashtrasin Madurai,
TirthankarRoy describes how the Sourashtrascontinue to form a tightly
organizedcommunitywith a 'sense of a secluded collective'(Roy 1997: 447).
As upwardlymobile artisan-capitalists, the Sourashtrascemented their com-
munityties with the investmentof privateprofitsin common assets,and par-
ticularlyin education.Among Madurai Sourashtras, the community
therefore,
consciouslyreproducedover time is thatof a singlecaste.However,thisneed
not necessarilybe the case. In Bhavani as in Kumarapalayam, the community
createdencompassesalmostthe entiretown and is not generatedthroughthe
consolidationof a particularcaste.I suggest,therefore, thatwhilstthe nature
of the communitygeneratedmay varybetween localities,the formationof its
boundariescannot be understoodoutside the contextof the wider social and
economnicrelationshipsand, in this case, the labour relationswhich lie at the
heart of these textilecommunities.
While in Madurai the Sourashtrashandloom weavers worked virtually
like a guild and a closed industry (Roy 1997: 459), in Bhavani and
Kumarapalayam,the handloom and powerloom industrieshave been opened
up to a heterogeneousgroup of workersand manufacturers from different
backgrounds. Here, the hybrid social composition of the industry has
contributedto the formationof a communitybeyond the confinesof caste
or class.
At the risk of overgeneralizing, it can be argued that two major, but
morphologicallyrelated models have been developed of the relation be-
tween temple and society in South India, one which captures the form
of this relationshipin the village and another in the great city.In what
follows I will firstbrieflyoutline these two models, which are by now
widely accepted. Then, I will continue by showing that the form of the
relation between temple organizationand local sociopolitical structurein
these two small towns is a dynamic combination of the 'village' and the
'kingly'models. I will demonstratehow this relationis particularlyaffected
by the competition between local 'big men' and wealthy industrialists to
gain authority and to build constituencies,by their interest in fash-
ioning a peaceful town 'community' and maintaininglabour discipline,
and by contemporarygovernmentpolitics related to temple control and
endowment.
 GEERT DE NEVE 503

Temples, great'and 'little'kings

festivals,

In many South Indian villages,the tutelarydeity of the localityis a goddess

who is celebratedin an annual festivalwhich usuallybringsthe various social
segmentsof the village together.The centralrole of these village goddesses
and theirannual festivalsin the creationof a symbolicvillage unityhas been
emphasizedby various scholars.In Fuller'ssummary, 'it is throughthe divi-
sion of ritual labour that an "organic solidarity"... is generatedamong the
various castesand familieswithinthe village,as focused on and organizedby
the headmen' (1992: 135).
Moreover,the generationof villageunityin templefestivals seems to follow
a specificpattern.First,it centresaround a ritualdivisionof labour in which
all caste groups fulfila particulartask,usuallyon a hereditarybasis and in a
hierarchically complementaryway (Beck 1972; Dumont 1970). Second, spon-
sorshipof the festivalis oftenmet by collectingmoney or provisionsfromthe
various participatinggroups (usually castes).Third, each group also enjoys
certain'rights'and 'honours', such as receivingthe holy ashes (vibuti)or the
rightto pull the car of the goddessthroughthe village streets(see Beck 1981;
Good 1985; 1987; Reiniche 1979). Finally,the festivalis usuallypresidedover
by a local chieftainor village headman,whose role and authorityis modelled
on thatof the greatking.
In Medieval South India, the relationshipbetween temple and society
reflectedthe natureof South Indian kingship.Stein (1978: 7) introducedthe
concept of 'sharedsovereignty' between rulersand deitiesto describehow the
deity shared royal attributes,while the king shared in the divine powers.2
Pivotal to the royaldutyof protectionof the kingdomand its inhabitantswas
the protectionof the temples,which was largelyconstitutiveof the king's
political role.To be a true king is to standin a proper relationshipwith the
gods (Fuller 1988: 59). In practice,this protectivemandate resultedin the
directinvolvementof the king in the affairsof the temples(Appadurai1981;
Dirks 1987; Fuller 1984; 1988), above all reflectedin the large endowments
the kings made to the maintenanceof temples,the staging of rituals and
festivals,and the rewardingof priestsand other temple staff.The resources
donated were in turn redistributedas 'shares',in the form of 'honours' to
the donor, the temple staff,and the community of worshipersat large
(Appadurai 1981: 20-62; Appadurai & Breckenridge1979: 196-200).
Competitionforhonourswas rife,as the legitimacyof one rulerwas always
open to challengeby another.During the late pre-colonialperiod,the rise of
new warrior leaders and lineages, each aspiring to regional rule, led to
ritualizedcompetition,investmentin temples,and endowmentsof festivalson
a scale never before achieved (Dirks 1987: 22-57; Price 1996: 9-34). Dirks
remindsus that'the growingimportanceof templescan be seen as a reflec-
tion of and a stimulusto the elaboration and consolidation of localcommunities,
making theirrules sufficiently honorable (or powerful)to make possible (or
necessitate)their incorporationinto royalrelationshipsin hithertounprece-
dented ways' (1987: 30, emphasisadded; see also Price 1996: 34).
Under Britishrule,the governmentbegan to act as donor and protectorof
templesin an attemptto extendthe indigenousmodel of royalpatronageinto
the colonial era (Appadurai1981: 105-64; Dirks 1987: 358-83; Rudner 1994:
504 GEERT DE NEVE

146). At the same time,groups of wealthyzamindars, bankers,and merchants

began to compete forthe controlof templesby providinglarge endowments
in importantmerchanttowns,so that political authority, religioushonours,
and economic investmentappeared inseparable.3A number of fascinating
accounts of these changing processes are available to us (e.g. Mines 1994;
Rudner 1994).
In what followsI will brieflyintroducethe main celebrationsof the goddess
festival,annuallycelebratedin the towns of Bhavani and Kumarapalayam.It
will be argued thatthe festivaland its organizationshow importantsimilari-
ties with what I have called the 'village' model above, while the substantial
involvementof local big men and wealthytextileindustrialists as patronsand
protectorsalso reflectscharacteristics
of the 'kingly'model, at least in its more
recent,dynamicand competitiveform.This morphologicalsymbiosiscan only
be understoodin relationto the big men's continued searchfor constituen-
cies,authority,and power withina competitiveand dynamiceconomic envi-
ronment,in which the controllingand discipliningof labour formsa constant
concern.

and Kaliyamman:
Celliyaantiyamman a festivalof towngoddesses
Only a briefdescriptionof the annualgoddessfestivals will be provided,because
my concern here is with the wider contextof the festivals. Three festivalsare
celebrated simultaneously:that of Celliyaantiyammanand Mariyamman in
Bhavani and thatof Kaliyammanin Kumarapalayam.4 My main focusis on the
festivalof Celliyaantiyamman in Bhavani.5
These threegoddessesare worshippedfortheirprotectivepowers (sakti)to
ward offdiseasesand to cure those who have been afflicted by illnessesof all
sorts.The goddesses are believed to be 'pious' deities and devotees approach
them to ask for favoursor to find out their fortuneconcerningmarriage,
health,familyproblems,and business.In return,the devotees offermoney
to the goddess or make vows to participatein the fire-walkingand spear-
piercingriteswhich take place duringher annual festival.
The beginningof the Maci Tiruvila or the Maci Festival,a name which
refersto the Tamil month of Maci (February-March)duringwhich the fes-
tivalis held,is markedby the Puchaatudalor flowerceremony,duringwhich
the goddess'spermissionis asked to startthe festival.The hereditaryrightsto
performthis initial ceremony and, thus,to initiatethe festivalare held by
Ananda Murthi,a VellalarGounder froma nearbyvillageTottipalayam, whose
family- and, by extension,community- has enjoyed these rightsfor gen-
erations.6Every year he leads this opening processionand receivesthe holy
ashes (vibuti)and otherhonoursfirst.The processionthenproceedsto a smaller
Mariyammlan templewhere the headmen and membersof theArasanPadaiy-
atchi (Vanniyar)communityhave gatheredand are waitingto be invitedby
theVellalarGounders to take part in the festivaland to join the procession.
This invitationis a significantritualreproductionof the traditionalhierarchy
which existslocally between the dominantVellalarGounders and the Padaiy,-
atchi,who used to work as agriculturallabourersfor the former.With the
permissionof the goddess,the festivalcan then begin, but it is not until a
 GEERT DE NEVE 505

week later,when the Kotiyetrumor flag-raising ceremonytakesplace thatthe

actualfestivitiesstart.The hereditaryrightto hoistthe flagis held by the Sen-
gundarMudaliyars,while the rightto wash the flag-postis thatof theVaanika
Chettiyars.
From then onwards,the goddess is carriedaround the town each nightfor
twenty-four nightson a richlydecorated ther(car) and everynightthe right
'to pull the car' is given to anothercommunity. Thus, twenty-four commu-
nities'have theirday' in the festivalon which theyare fullyin command of
thepujas and abishekams (bathingceremony)in the temple,and duringwhich
theirleaders receive the honours.
The festivalgraduallygrowstowardsits climaxwith threemain ceremonies
standingout on the fifteenthand sixteenthdays. On the fifteenthday the
Tirttakutam YetuttalAbishekam(Waterpot-RaisingAbishekam)is held.This is
a particularlyunconventionalabishekam duringwhich all devoteesare allowed
inside the most sacredpart of the Celliyaantiyamman temple and are invited
to 'bathe' the goddess by pouring water fromthe Cauvery River over the
idol. This ceremony has a particularlypowerfulmeaning for the devotees
themselves. What the devotees stressabove all is that on this day theythem-
selves can performthe abishekam for the goddess and that everyone,includ-
ing the untouchableParaiyarand Chekkliyar,is allowed inside the sanctuary
on equal terms.Indeed, the goddess is said to be the 'Mother of all', and for
her all are equal. Thus, for those who participatein it, this ceremonyacts as
a particularlypowerfulritual that symbolicallyintegratesthe town into a
'communityof equals'.
The day followingthisceremony(Wednesday6 March in 1996) is uncon-
testablythe main festivalday.From beforesunrisetill late at nighta succes-
sion of ritualsand sacrificesis performedand both towns are fullyimmersed
in the worship of theirgoddesses.Two ritualsstand out and need mention-
ing.The firstis agnikuntamor fire-walking, stagedforKaliyammanin Kumara-
palayam,but devoteesfromBhavani and beyond also participate.Initiatedby
RRS Manithan and Muniyappan- who both belong to one of the wealth-
iest textilefamiliesin town - the devotees startto run over a fire-lineof
burningcoals in frontof the temple.7As they are possessedby the goddess,
they are referredto as samis (god) and because of a strictviratam(fast)and
their strongbhakti(faith,devotion),they claim not to feel any pain when
runningover the kuntam(fire-line).These ritualsform a crucial part of the
unmediated,direct,and personalexchangesbetweenthe devotee and the deity,
so characteristic of the ethos of personal devotion or bhaktiin South Indian
Hinduism (Fuller 1992: 185; Gombrich & Obeyesekere 1988: 189-90;
Hiltebeitel 1991: 440-2; Kapadia 1995: 124-5).
The second major ritualtakesplace followinga main processionin which
the goddess,referredto as sakti,is broughtinside the town fromthe north
and installedin her temple.The horse representing the goddess,the umbrella
protectingher,and the way in which she crosses,like a queen, the territory
under her protectionall contain explicitroyalsymbolism.The rightto bring
saktiinside the town is again held by the communityof VellalarGounders
who also opened the festival. As soon as saktihas been installedin the temple,
a final and most dramaticalagu (spear-piercing)procession,leading to the
climax of the festival,is startedduringlate afternoon.Some men pierce their
506 GEERT DE NEVE

sides with spears,while otherspierce long iron bars throughtheircheeks and

walk in thisway fromthe centreof town to the temple.A numberof women
also pierce theircheekswith long bars,but most women pierce theirtongues
with a thin needle with which they walk towardsthe temple.Apart from
alagu,also agni-sakti
(fire-energy)or 'the carryingof fire-pots'is performed.
In this way,the sixteenthday comes to an end. During the coming two
weeks the nightprocessionscontinue and also during these last days,several
communitiesstillhold importantrightsin the concludingrituals.Ultimately,
however,the festivaldraws to a close, only to be reenactedeleven months
later.

Representation
of thefestival
It is endlesslyrepeated that the Maci festivalis thefestivalof the town, its
inhabitantsand their goddess, that Celliyaantiyammanis the 'goddess of
everyone'(yellarukuamman)and that nobody can be excluded from active
participation.To convince me of the integrativeaspect of the festival, people
constantlyreferredto the ritual in which everyone is allowed to bathe
the goddess in the temple.Anybody can join the queue and most families
will be representedby at least one member.Moreover,participationin the
fire-walkingand spear-piercingritesis activelyencouraged,and people from
all communities,includinguntouchables,join these devotionalexpressions.
What is emphasized by everyone is that everyjati or samukam(caste,
community;except forthe untouchables,see below) will equally be allocated
one particularday to 'pull the car' and to receivethe firstashes and honours.
The presence of strong competition between the communities is plain.
Although the communityof Vanniyars,for example,is locally known as a
lower casteand is largelymade up of labourers(low class),theirsheernumbers
allowed them to collect a substantialamount of money and to stage one
of the most admired and elaborate car processions.This participationon
equal terms clearly transcendsthe inequalities inherentin the division of
labour and the distributionof specifichereditaryrightsat particularstagesof
the festival.
This emphasison the unityof the town and the equalityof all is especially
importantwithinthe contextof a burgeoninglocal textileindustryin which
intense competitionhas been thrivingduring recent decades, competition
which has enhanced the local divisionsof class and amplifiedfissureswithin
castesand lineages,particularly those of the traditionalweaving communities.
While in Bhavani, for example, unionized handloom workers have been
ferventlyfightingfor higherbonuses and betterwages since the 1960s, the
powerloom operators of Kumarapalayamare devising more individualized
strategiesto underminetheiremployers'recruitment and discipliningpractices
(De Neve 1999a: 119-78; 1999b). However, as exemplifiedby the festival,
within this urban and increasinglyindustrializedcontext,the workers'old
sense of belonging to a communitybeyond that of theirown caste or sub-
caste has not withered.In the past this communitywas the kingdom or the
village; now it is a village-turned-town with which all the inhabitantsare
eager to identify.It is duringthe festivalof its tutelarydeitiesthatthiseager-
 GEERT DE NEVE 507

ness is most unambiguouslyvoiced. As for the employersand industrialists,

whose expressedconcern is the controllingand discipliningof a heteroge-
neous labour force,it is not difficultto see that theiractive encouragement
of a sense of unityand equalityamong all makesperfectbusinesssense.I will
returnto thisissue below.

Divisionoflabour:ritualcontinuity
Let us now relatethe festival's representationsof equalityand village unityto
the ritual division of labour, rightsand honours among the participants.In
1996, twenty-four communitieswere allocated one day each to pull the car,
startingon Wednesday22 February(16 Maci) and lastingtill 16 March (3
Panguni) in the order as displayedin Table 1.
Here, I want to draw attentionto several points of similaritywith the
organizationof comparablefestivals in villages.First,the Brahmanshave been
allocated a day in the festivaland thus take activepart in the celebrationsof

TABLE 1. Chronological allocation of the right to pull the festival car to various
communities(Celliyaantiyamman,Bhavani, 1996)*

[Day] Community Celebrations Specific rights

1 Flower Ceremony (Puchaatudal) VellalarGounder

8 Vaniya Chettiyar Flag-Raising Ceremony SenguntharMudaliyar
(Kotiyetrum)
9 Maniyakarar
10 Komati Chettiyar
11 Naidu
12 Karuneegar
13 SenguntharMudaliyar**
14 Vellalar Gounder
15 Twenty-FourManai
Telugu Chettiyar
16 Jangamar Deppa Utchavam Jangamar
17 Tiruneelakandar(potter) Waterpot-RaisingAbishekam VellalarGounder
18 Brahman Fire-Walking,Spear-Piercing; Vellalar Gounder
Goddess Procession
19 Vellan Chettiyar Car Festival Vellalar Gounder
20 Manottar
21 Devangar Chettiyar
22 Flower Merchants
23 Sound SystemProviders
24 Gumastagal (clerks)
25 Mukkulattor
26 Barbers
27 Dhobi
28 Betel Leaf Merchants
29 SrinivasapuramNagar
30 Malayalees
31 Viswakarma

*Source: Celliyaantiyammantemple administration, Bhavani.

**These include all subcastesof Mudaliyar,usually referredto as Sengunthar.
508 GEERT DE NEVE

the goddess,even thoughthe latteris a non-vegetariandeityforwhom various

sortsof sacrificesare made. The Brahmansalso performan essentialrole at
the beginningof the festivalwhen theytie the kappu(tumericsacredthread)
to the wristsof theAanti Pantaramtempleprieststo protectthem againstthe
aroused,and potentiallydangerous,powers of the goddess duringthe festival.
Althoughtheywithdrawwhen animal sacrificesare made, the Brahmansare
presentto witnessthe various formsof devotionalrites,processions,and car
decorationsof other communities.
Second, although the local untouchable communities of Paraiyarsand
Chekkliyarsdo not enjoy the rightto decoratethe goddess or to pull her car
on any particularday,thisdoes not mean thattheyare entirelyexcluded from
active participation.They continue to be essentialas drummersduring the
various processionssince the beat theyprovide is crucial to arouse the sakti
of the goddess and to stimulatea state of trance necessaryfor possessionto
occur.8They are also allowed to enter the temple to bathe the goddess and
participatein the ritesof fire-walking,
spear-piercing,and agni-sakti.
However,
even thoughtheirhereditarytasksand activeparticipationintegratesthem in
the festivaland, consequently,in the wider community, theirlow statuspre-
vents them fromacquiring full and equal rightsin the celebrationsof the
goddess.9
The ritualdivision of labour also reflectshow certainrightsand honours
have been ascribed to particularcommunitiesand persons on a hereditary
basis.Whilst today the right-hand/left-hand division,as described by Beck
(1972) for the Coimbatore district,has lost much of its social meaning,
the right-handVellalar Gounders continue to play a crucial role in the
festivaland their ritual dominance over the left-handcaste of Vanniyarsis
particularlypronounced.As described above, it is a VellalarGounder family
which holds the rightsto open the festivaland to 'invite' the Vanniyarsto
participate.Moreover,the VellalarGounders have the crucial rightto invite
saktiinto the town on the sixteenthday of the festivaland only they are
entitled to pull the large wooden temple car during the Car Festival on
the following day.The most importantrituals of the festivalare thus still
in the hands of the ritually and socially dominant right-handcaste of
Vellalar Gounder. Other communities,which have become increasingly
importantin the town today,have also been allocated specifictasks.Thus,
locally dominantleft-handweaving castesperformessentialroles in the con-
temporaryfestival: the Mudahyarhave the rightto hoistthe flag(Kotiyetrum),
the Jangamarwill entertainthe goddess on the river(Deppa Utchavam),and
in Kumarapalayamthe Devangar Chettiyarsopen the fire-walkingritual.
Although the festivalprimarilyintegratesthe various communitiesin town,
traditionalsocial hierarchiesfind continued ritual expressionthroughoutthe
celebrations.
I hope to have shown thatthisurbanfestivalcontainsunmistakablefeatures
of the 'village' model. The ways in which ritual labour is divided, contri-
butions are made, rights distributed,and traditionalheadmen honoured
reveal remarkablecontinuitieswith village-typefestivalorganization.I will
now discuss how the festivalhas been transformedin an urban context
and how big men have come to play pivotal roles as donors,patrons,and
organizersbeyond the traditionaldivisionof labour and honours.
 GEERT DE NEVE 509

Changesin theorganization
of thefestival
Despite significantvillage similarities,the festivalhas undergone important
transformations in the urbalncontextand over the lastyears.First,thereis the
sheer size of the festival.Rather than slowlydisappearingfromthe scene,the
urbangoddessfestivalis everyyearcelebratedin an increasingly grandmanner
with a growingnumberof devotees.10In Bhavani and Kumarapalayam, I was
told,duringthe early 1990s a few hundreddevoteeswalked over the fire;in
1995 three thousand participated;in 1996 five thousand participantswere
expected,while the local newspaperreportedafterthe event thatmore than
ten thousandpeople had walked the fireunder a vow. More revealingthan
mere numbersis the fact that participationis no longer reservedfor a few
samiyadi(god-men) who have the inheritedabilityto be possessedby a par-
ticulardeity(see e.g. Biardeau 1989; Kapadia 1995), but open to all who have
takena vow.Moreover,the assertionthattheirexclusionfrompossessionpro-
vides clear evidence that a strongbias existsagainstwomen in the religious
sphere(Caldwell 1996: 207-16; Kapadia 1995: 124-30) does not seem to hold
in the context of these urban celebrations(see also Beck 1981; Reiniche
1979). In 1996, as manywomen as men were participating in the fire-walking
and spear-piercingceremonies,and women were equally possessed by Cel-
liyaantiyanuman and Kaliyanmman. I would argue, in fact,that it is mainly
women who make a vow to the goddess,as theyare the ones primarilypre-
occupied with the health and well-beingof the family.
The festivalhas been gettinglongerand more spectaculareveryyear.While
the core of the festivalis structuredaround a standardpatternof sixteendays,
the car processionstook place during a period of twenty-four days in 1996.
The priestof the Celliyaantiyamman templeinformedme that,apartfromthe
Vellalar Gounder, only six communitieshad the right to pull the car as
recentlyas ten to fifteenyearsago; these were the socially,ritually, and eco-
nomically dominant caste groups in the area. In recent years,two major
changes have shaped the elaborationof the festival.Gradually,more commu-
nitieshave been given the rightto one day in the festivalon which theyhave
the responsibility
to take care of the abishekams and the honourof decorating
the goddess and takingher in procession.Second, this rightis now given to
conmmunities otherthan caste groups,such as the flowermerchants, betel leaf
merchants,and Malayalees,as well as to individualdonors,usuallyrich mer-
chantsand manufacturers. In the Mariyanmman temple,for example,two days
of the festivalwere endowed (kattalai)by individual factoryowners.The
Kaliyammanfestivalhas been dominatedby the membersof the RRS family
(Devangar Chettiyars), who today act as generouspatronsof the temple and
the festivalas a whole. And three new groups were added in 1996: the
mechanics and electricians(that is, those who provide the sound and light
systemsduringthe festival), the gumastagal(clerksin textileand other shops),
and the Srinivasapuramneighbourhood.The auto-rickshaw drivers were
equally eager to have theirday in the festival.Good's studyof recentchanges
in the festivalof a small town, Sulamalai,in Tamilnadu comes closest to my
observationsin Bhavani and Kumarapalayam:
SpecialAbisekams... are oftenperformed
on festival
days,and are frequentlysponsoredby
privategroupsor individuals.Mandapamrotasat the big festivals
are virtually
immutable,
510 GEERT DE NEVE

but there is scope for more 'modern' groups,recruitedaccording to achieved ratherthan

ascribed criteria,to come forwardas Abisekam sponsors.The local police, the Trader'sAsso-
ciation,the Businessman'sAssociation,the Mother's Committee,as well as wealthyindivid-
uals from Sulamalai and elsewhere,all financed elaborate and expensiveAbisekams during
1983-84 (1987: 9).

The incorporationof more diversegroups points out how the contem-

poraryfestivalintegratesthe entiretown,while at the same time a number
of individualmerchant-manufacturers increasinglystand out as 'patrons'and
'benefactors'.As a result,the generationof an 'organic solidarity'continuesto
figureat the heart of the celebrations,but the traditional'village' and caste
headmen are increasinglybeing superseded by wealthy industrialists. What
emergesis big-cityendowmentstyleorientatedtowardsvillage-typecommu-
nityintegration.

Patronsand benefactors
The growingsize and attractionof the festival,and the incorporationof an
increasingnumber of'communities',cannot be understoodwithout simulta-
neously looking at shiftsin the wider politico-organizational featuresof the
festival.It is in the promotion,financing,and organizationof the festivalthat
the role of local big men has become crucial.Leaving the hereditaryhonours
and rightsto those customarilyentitledto them,these men have enteredthe
festivalscene throughvariousbackdoors.Firstof all,most of themplayleading
roles as a member or presidentof the newly establishedtemple committees
thatwere startedover the last few decades.
Here I need to describe the role of the Tamilnadu state governmentin
temple politics during the last century.Following the expansion of British
rule, the new rulersof the South became involvedin temple affairson the
basis of theiralleged duty to protectthe temple,a taskwhich was modelled
on the earlier royal protectivemandate. Practically,the state government's
involvementin templeaffairs took the formof interferencewith templeritual,
controlof day-to-daytemple managementand endowment,and intervention
in the case of templeconflictsor abuses (Appadurai1981: 214-17; Fuller 1984:
112-34; 1996: 9; 15-22). Governmentinvolvementwas channelled through
the Hindu Religious Endowments Board, establishedin 1926, which had
directpower over temple committeesand was responsiblefor the appoint-
ment of the templeExecutiveOfficers.ThisBoard was replacedin 1951 with
the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Department,
which up to this day closely supervisestemple managementand affectsreli-
gious practice (Fuller 1996: 15-29). Over the last few decades, the HR&CE
Department has extended its impact by bringingan increasingnumber of
templesunderits directcontrol.Consequently,the templecommitteesbecame
crucial loci of temple control where governmentinvolvementmet local
patronageand organization.It is thesecommitteeswhich are now increasingly
dominatedin Bhavani and Kumarapalayamby local big men.
The three temples under discussion all came under the control of the
HR&CE Departmentduring the last twentyyears.Their committeesorga-
nize the yearlyfestivaland decide how many communitieswill be allowed to
 GEERT DE NEVE 511

the trajectoriesof the processionsand when and where pujas and

participate,
abishekamswill be held. These committeesare one of the main channels
throughwhich the local big men are able to spread theirinfluenceand to
promote the temple,its festival,and their own patronage.For example, in
1983, the Celliyaantiyammantemple came under HR&CE Department
controland a temple committeewas startedwith J.K. Tiagaraj,a Mudaliyar
and one of the most influentialtextile industrialists in Bhavani, as its pre-
sident.It was under his supervisionthat in the same year the temple was
completelyrenovatedand a kumbabishekam held. A plate in the temple wall
mentionsthe names of J.K. Tiagaraj and other textile manufacturers as the
main contributors to the renovations.In 1995, anotherkumbabishekam was held
aftera second renovation,entirelyfunded by the local devotees,had been
completed.The templecommitteehas now set up a Temple Renovation Fund
for which money is being collected to assurethe continuedmaintenanceof
the templein the futureas well as the organizationof a kumbabishekam every
twelveyears.
Moreover,these local developmentsarguablytie in with state-wideshifts
in temple politics. Fuller has described how under AIADMK government
(1991-6) a Chief Minister'sTemple Renovation and Maintenance Fund was
set up under the direct authorityof Jayalalithato stimulatethe renovation
and maintenanceof temples in the state.He notes that 'money from the
Chief Minister'sfund has helped to stimulatea dramaticrise in the number
of kumbabhishekams which have taken place recently,and although many
of these ritualshave been wholly or mainlypaid for by privatedonations,
the government'ssupportive attitude has also encouraged them' (Fuller
1996: 23).
The Mariyamman temple in Bhavani and the Kaliyamman temple in
Kumarapalayamhave similarlybeen renovated,expanded, and placed under
governmentcontrol over the last years,while their temple committeesare
equally dominated by the leading local textile entrepreneurs. Through their
membershipin these committees,these industrialists attemptto consolidate
theirpositionas benefactorsof the communityat large.However,I hastento
add thatcommunityunityis fragile,internallydividedby competitivepolitics
between big men. As mentionedabove, it was preciselythe intensifiedcom-
petitionand warfarebetween variousTamil political centreswhich led to an
increasein temple endowmentand ritualinvestmentduringthe seventeenth
and eighteenthcenturies(Dirks 1987; Price 1996). Similarly, duringthe nine-
teenthcentury, enhanceddisputesbetweenlocal communityleadersand settler
merchantsfurthersustainedcompetitiveritualinvestment(Dirks 1987; Mines
1994; Rudner 1994). I argue that the nature and extent of contemporary
communityinvestmentin Bhavani and Kumarapalayamhas to be understood
in the same light.
One example is that of the long-standingbusiness dispute between J.K.
Tiagaraj and S.T. Sundaramin Bhavani.Educated in the textileshops of the
leading textilemanufacturer J.K. Tiagaraj,S.T. Sundaram managed to set up
his own shop and laterbecame the biggestyarnmerchantin town.The initial
friendshipbetween the two men, who belong to the same caste of Kaikolar
Mudaliyar,soon broke down and turned into bitteranimosity.Competition
between these industrialists has recentlybeen projected onto the religious
512 GEERT DE NEVE

plane as both began to invest in differenttemples, to control different

fundsand festivals, and to build different constituencies.J.K.Tiagaraj has been
promotinghimselfand his closest business ally,Annasami,as the principal
benefactorsand patronsof the local Murugan temple.J.K.Tiagaraj is the pre-
sident of the temple's Renovation Committee, held a kumbabishekam in
1991 aftermajor renovationsand largelyfinancedthe newlyconstructedsilver
temple car which is now daily pulled around the inner courtyardof the
temple.Similarly, he has been the leading figurebehind the renovationsand
activitiesin the Celliyaantiyamman temple.S.T. Sundaram,on the otherhand,
has been investingheavily in the Mariyammantemple located in his own
neighbourhood,Srinivasapuram. As presidentof the temple and its commit-
tees,he receivesmost honours and enjoysparticularprivilegesduringthe fes-
tivalsstagedin this temple.As such,the intensification of businessrivalriesis
directlyrelatedto the carefuldevelopmentof constituenciesformedaround
big men, theirtemplesand festivals. However,althoughtheirendowmentsare
essentiallycompetitivein nature,their donations are unmistakablydirected
towardsthe consolidationof a wider communityidentity.
Two aspectsare revealingin this respect.First,theyare activelycontribut-
ing to the improvementand promotion of potu koilsor common temples,
accessibleto everyone,ratherthan to templesbelongingto specificsegments
of the society.Second, theyalso play a key role in promoting,financing,and
stagingthe festivalby activelyparticipatingin the celebrations.Promotionof
the festivaltakesthe formof printingand distributing informative leaflets.In
variouslocal meetingstheyinvitethe people to participatein the fire-walking
and spear-piercing ceremonies,which are ofteninitiatedby the big men them-
selves.In 1996, for example,RRS Manithan announced that he had invited
the wife of the famousTamil filmactorPrabhuto takepartin the fire-walking
ceremonyin Kumarapalayam.On the morningof the fire-walking, the cere-
mony was opened by Prabhu'swife walkingover the fireas firstdevotee,fol-
lowed by RRS Manithan,his brothersand theirwives.Their participationwas
taken by the devotees as a crucial sign of the genuinenessof theirinvolve-
mentin the festivaland of theirattachmentto the goddess,the town,and the
people of Kumarapalayam.In Bhavani,S.T. Sundaramwas also presentat the
main stagesof the festivaland was honoured at variouspoints,while his sons
were also participating in the urvilaiyatu(town game) duringwhich mud and
dirtis thrownat everyone.
Although it was inmpossible to obtain exact figuresof financialcontri-
butions,it is plain that the big men investheavilyin what is on one level
a town festivalbut, on another,is the creation of a 'community'- and a
communityidentity- for which they presentthemselvesas patrons.They
make great effortsto attractdevotees to 'their' temples and festivalsin an
attemptto consolidate their own constituencyof followers.Moreover,they
are eager to presentthemselvesas the providersof all sortsof social welfare.
An influentialindustrialist called it part of the 'culture'or the 'way of life' of
the wealthiermen in Bhavani and Kumarapalayamto support the poorer
people in town'beyond the employmentand the wages-theyare givingthem'.
Clearly,this talk of generosityand patronageacts as a justificationfor the
wealthof a fewpowerfulindividuals,a wealthwhich theyfeelmorallyobliged
to share.
 GEERT DE NEVE 513

J.K.Tiagaraj providesa clear example of this widespreadattitude.On his

seventiethbirthdayin 1996 Tiagaraj distributedlarge amounts of money to
the people of Bhavani in a spectacularbirthdayparty.He opened a new hos-
pitalforwhich he is providingall the funds,he organizeda freemasswedding
forfifty-onecouples forwhom he bought the talis,and he financedfreeeye
treatmentin a Madurai hospitalfor whoever needed it. The birthdayparty
turned out to be a tremendoussuccess and he was widely praisedby many
weaversas a generousand sympatheticman who investsnot only in his own
future,but also in the welfareof the community.

Socialwelfare,
patronage
and community
formation
At the same time,thiscare forthe welfareof the town has takena more insti-
tutionalizedformin the establishment of hospitals,schools,colleges,and other
institutionsof public welfare.In 1980, RRS Purushotamfounded the RRS
Instituteof TextileTechnologyin Kumarapalayamto promote the education
of youngstersfromweavingbackgroundsand to providethemwith the tech-
nical skillsrequiredto find employmentin a modernizingtextile industry.
Education has become the main focusof the capitalist-manufacturers and eru-
dition is seen as the crucial preconditionfor the advancementof the town.
Both the RRS and JTT families(thissecond familyhas been the major com-
petitorto the RRS familyfor many years;they are equally wealthytextile
industrialistsin Kumarapalayam)have founded various schools and colleges
over the last twentyyears in which seats have been primarilyreservedfor
studentsof the locality.Two medical colleges have been establishedin co-
ordinationwith various hospitals erected by the same families.The JTT
Engineering College has also become increasinglypopular.While it is not
surprisingthat these institutionsopenly displaythe names of theirfounders,
they also reflectthe latters'involvementin the welfare and upliftof the
locality.
In 1995, I participatedin the opening of a firstChild Labour School in
Kumarapalayam, which was an initiativeof RRS Manithan.Althoughhe rec-
ognizes that childrenare still being employed in his own mills,he actively
tries to encourage parentsand employersto send the childrento school as
well.The inaugurationof the school was givenspecial attentionin a masspro-
cessionwhich was headed by the DistrictCollector,the MunicipalityOfficer,
and otherprominentpeople. Althoughit would be naive to expect thatsuch
initiativeswill solve the problem of child labour at its roots,they do reflect
an awarenessamong the local industrialists that theirprosperitycannot con-
tinue to thriveon the unbridled exploitationof others.It is here that old
conceptsof 'patronageand exploitation'acquire new contentsin an urbanand
industrializedcontext (Breman 1993).
Numerous other associations and institutionshave become channels
throughwhich local weaver-capitalists are fashioningthemselvesas patronsof
the workers.Two of these are the Rotary and Lion Clubs, whose explicitaim
is to provideservicesto the public. In 1995-6, the Rotary Club was actively
involvedin a polio eradicationprojectand campaignedto get people to send
theirchildrenfor a freevaccination.One of the chartermembersand most
514 GEERT DE NEVE

influentialpersonsin the club is Mallaya Raj Pandaram,the wealthiesttextile

manufacturer of the local Jangamarcommunity. The Chamber of Commerce
of Kumarapalayamis yet anotherassociationwhich is increasingly involvedin
the generalimprovementof the town and its inhabitants. Includingthe largest
powerloom manufacturers and businessmenin town,the Chamber is chaired
by RRS Manithan and meets on a monthlybasis.
Issues taken up in these meetingsinclude the promotion of the Child
Labour School, the developmentof a Master Plan for town improvements
(new roads,undergrounddrainage,improveddrinkingwater,a parkand a new
industrialsite for the expansion of the export industries),the building of a
new post office,the expansion of the police department,and theirdemand
for theirown firebrigade (at the moment thereis only one firebrigade for
Bhavani and Kumarapalayam). The organizationof the weeklymarketand the
improvedbus access to the centralbus stand were also debated.The Mu-
nicipalityOfficerapologized fora numberof the Municipality'sshortcomings
and praisedthe work of the Chamber.Indeed, the concernsof the Chamber
reflecthow the local industrialists themselveshave takenup a series of issues
of wider public interestwhich one would normallyexpect to fall under the
province of the Town Municipalityor the District Collector. However, the
workingarena of the local governmentis profoundlyrestrictedby the pri-
orities and projects imposed by an industrialistelite eager to protect its
businessinterests, involvedwith concernsof public inter-
but also increasingly
est and welfare.The parallel with the activitiesand roles of the Nagarattar
Chettiyarsin Madras and othermajor citiesis plain.The Nagarattarsinvested
heavilyin temples,educationalinstitutions, privateclubs,and public charity
and these acts ' - far from constitutingirrationalexpendituresfor other-
worldly ends - were investmentsin the conditions that made worldly
commerce possible' (Rudner 1994: 158).
What is the strategicimportanceforthe capitalistentrepreneur of theseacts
of public patronage?Differentinterestsare at stake.Firstof all, there is the
intensecompetitionbetween the various manufacturers and merchantsfor a
share of trade and for the recruitmentof factorylabour.Being known as a
generousemployerhelps to attractskilledlabourersand to keep one's looms
runningday and night.Moreover,the industryitselfgreatlybenefitsfroma
peaceful and unifiedlabour community.Investingin smooth labour relations
is done in various ways,but tokens of generosity, especiallyat festivaltimes,
are crucial to this goal. Indeed, local and state governmentsupportfor the
industriescan also be guaranteedwhen the localityis freeof struggles, be they
of a class or caste nature.
Also, I suggestthat the acts of patronageare essentialto the creation of
new social roles for those weaver-capitalists who were able to benefitfrom
new forms of prosperityduring the past decades and thereforeto dif-
ferentiatethemselvesfromfellow weavers.These weaver-capitalists remained
dependentforlabour and co-operationupon theirfellow caste membersand
increasinglyalso upon workers from non-weaving backgrounds.In their
attemptto avoid possible pressuresresultingfromtheirnew economic posi-
tion and to generateloyaltyamong theirworkers,theychose to act as patrons
of the latter.In theirown words,theypresentthemselvesas town-widebene-
factorsand emphasize how they take care of their workers'beyond the
 GEERT DE NEVE 515

generouswages they pay'. As one employerput it: 'generositytowardsthe

workersis part of the culture of this area'. They unfailinglyreferto their
schools,colleges,and hospitals,which are accessibleto anyone in town.They
systematicallydeny that caste identityor kinshiplinks would impose selec-
tivityupon theiracts of patronage.
Moreover, the discipliningand control of labour becomes a less pro-
blematicprocesswhen situatedwithina frameworkof patron-clientrelation-
ships.Afterhaving distinguishedthemselveseconomically and socially from
theirfellowtownsmen,the wealthierindustrialists feltthe need to reintegrate
themselvesinto the 'community'and accomplishedthisby linkingtheirown
prosperityto the welfareof the town as a whole.1"This is expressedin the
generousdistributionof food and clothes at special occasions,it is reflected
in the financingand promotingof temples,schools, colleges, and hospitals.
But it is most dramaticallymanifestedin the ritualintegrationof the entire
communityand the generationof a shared communityidentityduring the
yearlycelebrationsof the local goddess.

Patronsand theirconstituencies
Discussing the nature of leadershipand big men in a Madras city commu-
nity,Mines arguesthata communityis identifiedwith its pre-eminentmen,
its templesand its institutionsin a highlypersonalizedway (1994: 49-146).
He discusseshow the rise and decline of the communityof Beeri Chettiyars
in the Georgetown neighbourhood was closely related to changes in the
authorityand power of its caste headmen.What Mines describesis 'a dis-
tinctiveform of traditionalorganizationin which the paradigmof societyis
not caste hierarchy, nor conceptualizationsof purityand impurity, nor even
priestlyversus kinglymodes of behavior,but that of constituencies,which
form around dominantindividualsand their patronage'(1994: 107). More-
over,apart froma galaxy of 'charitableinstitutions', the Kandasamitemple in
Madras and its processionsconstitutethe 'key institutionalsymbol'not only
of the Beeri Chettiyarcommunityas a whole, but also of its leadersand asso-
ciations (1994: 65). When, during the 1980s, a successfulcommunityleader
tried to rebuild the community,the temple was centralto his attempt.He
aimed at making the temple attractiveagain by maximizingthe spectacular
(constructionof a golden templecar,a kumbabishekam, etc.). Grand displayand
ritualinnovationwere introducedto attractcrowdsand dramatizethe leader's
patronage.
While the materialpresentedhere seems fullyto supportMines's analysis
of the nature of leadership and the processes of community-buildingin
Madras, an importantdifferenceemerges,regardingthe natureof the 'com-
munity'at stake. Unlike the Beern Chettiyaror Nagarattarmerchants,the
'community'consciouslypromotedby the Bhavaniand Kumarapalayamindus-
trialistsis not that of a corporatecaste group (e.g. among the Sourashtrasin
Madurai; see Roy 1997) nor that of a group of castes (e.g. the right-hand
castes;see Beck 1972), but that of the entireurban centre.The templesthey
renovate,the festivalsthey promote, and the institutionsthey found are
open to all the inhabitantsof the locality and aim at the integrationof a
516 GEERT DE NEVE

town-wide community, based on a communityidentitywhich largelyresults

froma sharedidentification with a temple,a festival,a leader,an industry, and
a locality.
have lost theirsocial meaningin
This is not to argue thatcaste affiliations
the urban environment.But, due to the multipleinterrelations of caste and
businessnetworksas well as to theirenhanced dependence on workersfrom
various non-weaving backgrounds,local big men realize that an exclusive
focus on the advancementof a particularcaste group is no longerfeasibleor
desirable.They thereforeactively promote a sense of communitywhich
encompassesthe whole town. I suggest,therefore, thata comparisonbetween
the identityof the modern big man and that of the formerking is stillrel-
evant.As the king'sauthorityand legitimacywere predicatedon his abilityto
incorporateand protectall those under his realm,the big man's influence,
authority, and economic power depend on his capacityto integratethe entire
community, and not only the membersof his own caste group.Rather than
the model of identification between king and divinity, it is the idioms of royal
protectionand patronagewhich are most forcefully at work in contemporary
Tamil society.12
Undeniably,the form and nature of constituenciesin Tamil society has
undergoneshiftsover timewhich seem to reflecttransformations of the wider
social and political environment.In the pre-colonialera, constituenciesoften
took the form of littlekingdomswhich arose out of warriorclans and lin-
eages,and which were ruled by regionallypowerfulchiefs(Dirks 1987; Price
1996). They included whoever lived within the boundaries of the royal
territory.Along with the centralizationof administrative power and the con-
solidationof caste under colonial rule,constituencieswere increasinglybuilt
around influentialcaste leaders,oftenbelonging to major tradingand mer-
chantcastes,of which the NagarattarChettiyarand KaikolarMudaliyarleaders
have probably been most extensivelydocumented (Mines 1984; 1994;
Nishimura1998; Rudner 1994). The post-colonialera has again given rise to
more inclusivetypesof constituencieswhich are shaped more by common-
alitiesof localityand industrythan by the boundariesof caste.The searchfor
a new identityby emerging urban industrialists who now operate within
increasinglybroad social networkshas led to the opening up of constituen-
cies and 'communities'to a wider clientele."3
In a studyof fourSouth Asian weaving communitiesduringthe late colo-
nial period, Haynes describes how new capitalist-weavers refashionedtheir
roles and social identitieswithin their communitiesand towns.Apart from
convertingsome of theirfinancialcapitalinto symboliccapitalby acts of phil-
anthropy,'they also engaged in high profile"social work" intendedto provide
social upliftmentamong theirfellow communitymembers.... The contours
of weaving communitiesthemselvesbecame redefinedas networksof social
connectionand increasinglybecame linked to educationalinstitutions, coop-
erativesocietiesand municipalcouncils' (Haynes n.d.: 25).
What these new entrepreneursdid not do in this process,Haynes inte-
restinglyadds, was to identifythemselveswith an entirelynew social circle,
divorcedfromtheirown social origin and weavers'background,such as the
Brahmansor Banias (n.d.: 26). Also in Bhavani and Kumarapalayam, the new
'community'remainsfirmlyrooted in the social identityof weaver-artisans,
 GEERT DE NEVE 517

theirtemplesand goddesses.Nevertheless, in a modernizingindustrialcontext

thisidentityhas been reshapedto incorporatea wider group of people who
can all recognize themselvesas either textile workers or textile manufa-
cturers,and that communityencompassesjust about the entiretown.This, I
argue,is a communitymanifestation of an inclusivekind,which contrastswith
expressionsof communityalong the exclusivelines of caste or class. In this
context,the boundaries of exclusion and inclusion are ratherof an occupa-
tional (i.e. textiles)and territorial(i.e. town) nature,while in other locations
the 'community'maywell be builtaroundstrikingly differentidioms of shared
identity.

NOTES

'Bhavani is famous for its handwoven carpets,while in Kumarapalayampowerloomishave

graduallyreplaced handlooms fromthe 1950s onwards.The traditionalweaving castes in these
towns are the (Kaikolar) Mudaliyars, the Devangar Chettiyars,and the Jangamars.Other
communities,however,such as theVanniyars, Vellalar Gounders, and Nadars, have also entered
the textile industryas workers and factoryowners, especially since the development of the
powerloom industry.
with the world of gods, he was not divine himself(see
2While the king was closely identified
Appadurai 1981: 20-62; Appadurai & Breckenridge1976: 188-95; Biardeau 1989: 13-14; 53-8;
Fuller 1984: 104-6; 1988: 55-8; 1992: 106-27; Good 1987: 3-4).
3See, forexample,Dirks's (1987: 370-4) account of the disputesover templehonours between
the locally dominant nattarsand the rising NagarattarChettiyarsin many temple towns of
Pudukkottaifromthe mid-nineteenthcenturyonwards.
4I witnessed the festivalin February-March1996, and the descriptionwhich is given here
is predominantlybased on what I observed on that occasion and on what people told me
about the organizationof the festivalin previous years.
5Celliyaantiyammanis a local form of Cellattamman,'the Goddess of the Northern Gate',
who is known as the protectorof the northerngate and as the guardianof the village against
dangerand disease (Good 1985). In Bhavani,devoteesworshipCelliyaantiyamman as theirtown
goddess and closely identifyher with various formsof the village goddess Marivarnmlan. In the
northernpart of Bhavani, in the neighbourhood of Varnapuram,a new temple was built in
1982 and dedicated to SamayapuramMariyamman,a name which was most probablyborrowed
from the tremendouslypopular cult of Mariyamman in the village of Samayapuram in
Pudukkottai(see Nishimura 1987).
6Here the word 'community'ratherthan 'caste' is used. While traditionallythe groups who
held rightsin the festivalwere caste-based,more recentlyother groups and even individuals
have been given theirday in the festival(see below). Given the fluid,segmentaryorganization
ofTamil society,communitiesshiftin the meaningof theirconstitutionfromcontextto context.
Therefore,I use community to referto a variety of group formations,and community in
quotation marksto referto the town-communityas a whole (see below).
7All names mentioned in this article are pseudonyms.
8Drunuers are oftenbroughtin fromoutside. In Bhavani, however,theywere members of
the local Paraiyarcommunity.
9This patternof Harijan inclusion/complementarity in the context
and exclusion/replication
of village festivalsis reminiscentof Moffatt's(1979) discussions and has furtherbeen com-
mented upon by Beck (1972; 1981), Deliege (1997), Fuller (1992), and Good (1985).
10Gotnbrichand Obeyesekere have described the expansion of the Kataragama cult of
Murugan in Sri Lanka and similarlydocumented the sharp rise in devotional rites, and
especially kavadidances and fire-walking,during the annual festivalfrom the 1950s onwards.
Worship and patronageby wealthyNattukottaiChettiyarsgave a new fillipto the cult around
the mid-century(Gonmbrich& Obeyesekere 1988: 177-90). We could hypothesizefromthese
examples that rapid social and economic change tends to encourage the more outre'formsof
religious expression.
 518 GEERT DE NEVE

"The Gounder Vellalar employers,who have entered the industryonly over the last three
decades, do not investin communityfestivalsto the same extentas the factoryowners belong-
ing to the traditionalweaving castes.This is relatedboth to theirdifferentsocial statusand their
distinctways of dealing with labour within the textileindustry(see De Neve 1999b).
12This argumentis not dissimilarfromPrice's (1989: 560-1; 1996: 1-7) explicitstresson the
need to consider the longuedure'eof politics and the ways in which models and ideologies of
the pre-colonial and colonial periods have been carried on, even if transformed, in the twen-
tieth century.
"3This can be compared with Breman's (1996: 257) argumentthat'caste consciousnesscan
undergo scale enlargementin such a way that it approaches class consciousness:recognizing
members of other sub-castes as fellow sufferers and feeling solidaritywith them'. The scale
enlargementoccurring here, however,extends to the town as a whole. That these widening
circles of identificationneed not emerge always and everywhereis apparentfromRoy's case
studyof the Madurai Sourashtras(1997). However, the main point raised here is that whether
a wider communityidentificationwill take place or not cruciallydepends on the scale and
organizationof the local industryand industrial/labour relations.

REFERENCES

Appadurai, A. 1981. Worshipand conflict undercolonialrule: a South Indian case. Cambridge:

Cambridge UniversityPress.
& C.A. Breckenridge1976. The South Indian temple: authority, honour and redistri-
bution. Contributions to Indian Sociology10, 187-211.
Beck, B. 1972. Peasant societyin Konku: a study of rightand leftsubcastesin South India.
Vancouver:Universityof British Columbia Press.
1981.The goddess and the demon: a local South Indian festivaland its wider context.
Purusartha 5, 83-136.
Biardeau, M. 1989. Hinduism:theanthropology of a civilization.
Delhi: Oxford UniversityPress.
Breckenridge,C.A. 1978. From protectorto litigant:changingrelationsbetween Hindu temples
and the Raja of Ramnad. In South Indian temples(ed.) B. Stein, 75-106. New Delhi:Vikas
PublishingHouse.
Breman,J. 1993. Beyondpatronageand exploitation. Delhi: Oxford UniversityPress.
1996. Footlooselabour: workingin India's informaleconomy.Cambridge: Cambridge
UniversityPress.
Caldwell, S. 1996. Bhagavati:ball of fire.In Devi: goddessesof India (eds) J.S. Hawley & D.M.
Wulff,195-226. Berkeley:Universityof CaliforniiaPress.
Deliege, R. 1997. The world of the 'Untouchables':Paraiyarsof Tamil Nadu. Delhi: Oxford
UniversityPress.
De Neve, G. 1999a. Tamilwarpsand wefts: an anthropologicalstudyof urbanweaversin SouthIndia.
Ph.D. Thesis, Universityof London.
1999b.Askingforand givingbaki:neo-bondage,or the interactionof bondage and resis-
tance in the Tamilnadu power-loom industry.Contributions to Indian Sociology33, 379-406.
Dirks, N.B. 1987. The hollowcrown:ethnohistory of an Indian kingdom. Ann Arbor: Universityof
Michigan Press.
Dumont, L. 1970 (1966). Honio hierarchicus. London: Weidenfeldand Nicolson.
Fuller, CJ. 1984. Servantsof the goddess: the priestsof a South Indian temple.Cambridge:
Cambridge UniversityPress.
1985. Royal divinityand human kingshipin the festivalsof a South Indian temple.
SouthAsian Social Scientist1, 3-43.
1988. The Hindu temple and Hindu society.In Templein society(ed.) MV. Fox, 49-
66. Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns.
1992. The camphor flame:popularHinduismand societyin India. Princeton: Princeton
UniversityPress.
1996. Brahman temple priestsand Hindu revivalismin contemporaryTamilnadu. South
Indian Studies1, 1-34.
Gombrich,R. & G. Obeyesekere1988. Buddhismtransformed: changein Sri Lanka. Prince-
religious
ton: Princeton UniversityPress.
 GEERT DE NEVE 519

Good, A. 1985. The annual goddess festivalin a South Indian village. South Asian Social
Scientist1, 119-167.
1987. The religious, economic and social organization of a South Indian temple.
Quarterly 3, 1-25.
Journalof SocialAffairs
Haynes,D. n.d. The reformulationof social identitiesamong South Asian weaving communi-
ties,1910-1955. MS.
Hiltebeitel,A. 1991. The cult of Draupadi 2: on Hindu ritual and the goddesses.Chicago:
Universityof Chicago Press.
Inden, R. 1990. ImaginingIndia. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
Kapadia, K. 1995. Siva and hersisters.Oxford:Westview Press.
Mines, M. 1984. The warriormerchants: textiles,trade,and territoryin South India. Cambridge:
Cambridge UniversityPress.
1994. Publicfaces,privatevoices:comomunity and individualisnm in South India. Berkeley:
Universityof CaliforniaPress.
Moffatt,M. 1979. An Untouchable commnunity in South India. Princeton: Princeton University
Press.
Nishimura,Y 1987. A studyon Mariyamnian worsliipin SouthIndia: a prelimainary studyon mnodern
SouthIndian villageHinduism.Tokyo: ILCAA.
1998. Gender,kinshlip and property rights:Nagarattarwomanhoodin South India. Delhi:
Oxford UniversityPress.
Price, P 1989. Kingly models in Indian politicalbehavior:cultureas a medium of history. Asian
Survey29, 559-72.
1996. Kingshipand politicalpracticein colonialIndia. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Reiniche, M.--L. 1979. Les dieux et les hlomfines: d'un villagedu Tirunelveli,
e'tudedes cuiltes Inde du
Sud. Paris: Mouton.
1987. Worship of Kaliyanmianin some Tamnilvillages:the sacrificeof warriorweavers.
In Religionand societyin SouthIndia (eds) V. Sudarsen,G. PrakashReddy & M. Suryanarayana,
89-105. Delhi: BR PublishingCompany.
Roy, T. 1997. Capitalism and community:a studyof the Madurai Sourashtras.Indian Economic
and Social HistoryReview34, 437-63.
Rudner, D. 1994. Caste and capitalismn in colonialIndia: the NattukottaiChettiars.Berkeley:
Universityof CaliforniaPress.
Stein, B. 1978. Introduction.In South Indian tenmples: an analyticalreconsideration(ed.) B. Stein,
1-9. New Delhi: Vikas PublishingHouse.

Patronage et 'communaute': le role d'une fete 'villageoise'

Tamil dans l'integration d'une ville
Resu;ine
Cet articlese concentresur la fete des 'deesses de village' dans deux petitesvilles de Tamil-
nadu en Inde du Sud et explore la fa,on dont l'organisationurbaine des templeset des fetes
refleteles traitscaracteristiquesde l'organisationde fetessemblablesdans les villages,tandis
qu'en meme temps les 'actes de patronage' de riches industrielslocaux donnent forme au
type de 'communaut&'creee durant les fetes et a d'autres occasions. En elaborant sur les
expressionsde commnunaute villageoiseet surles modeles pre-coloniaux de royaute,les indus-
trielsjouent un role central dans la formationd'un sens communautairequi transcende
les limitesde caste et de classe.Je soutiens que la formationde limnites communautairesne
peut etre comprise hors d'un contexte plus large de relationssociales et economiques, en
l'occurrence les relationslaborales au coeur des industriestextilesen Inde du sud.

School of African and Asian Studies, Universityof Sussex, Faltner,Brighton BNI 9SJ.
GeertDeNeve@yahoo.co.uk