Periyar and Tamil Language: Dravidianism and Cultural Conflict

Encyclopedia of Ancient and Modern India

Encyclopedia of Contemporary Indian Politics

Periyar’s Language Politics: Tamil, Sanskrit, Hindi and English in Modern South India

Erode Venkata Ramasamy (Periyar) (17 September 1879 – 24 December 1973) occupies a controversial place in the intellectual history of the Tamil language. He was one of the most powerful political and social figures to mobilise Tamil-speaking society in the twentieth century, yet he was also one of its most severe internal critics. His position cannot be reduced either to hatred of Tamil (தமிழ்) or to conventional Tamil identity. For Periyar, a language was primarily an instrument of human advancement and not emotional heritage. Its antiquity, sacred status, literary prestige or emotional value had little importance if it did not serve rationalism, scientific knowledge, social equality, and individual self-respect.

Periyar was born in Erode, Madras Presidency, on 17 September 1879 into a prosperous trading family. His early life was shaped by the religious and social environment of nineteenth-century South India, but his later intellectual development moved sharply towards rationalism and anti-caste criticism. His experience at Kashi in the early twentieth century, where he encountered caste discrimination associated with access to a religious choultry, became an important element in his rejection of orthodox Hindu institutions. By the 1920s, his political vocabulary increasingly connected language, caste, religion, education and social power.

In 1925, after leaving the Indian National Congress, Periyar established the Self-Respect Movement (Suyamariyathai Iyakkam). Language was not its original supreme objective. Its central concerns were the destruction of caste hierarchy at the first instant, opposition to Brahminical social authority added later, then women’s emancipation, rationalism, atheism, and the creation of a society based upon self-respect rather than birth-based status. Tamil became one of the principal instruments through which these ideas reached ordinary people. His journals Kudi Arasu and later Viduthalai provided a continuous political vocabulary in Tamil, while the English journal Revolt (1928–1930) addressed another educated readership.

This produces the first apparent contradiction in Periyar’s linguistic thought: he used Tamil extensively while simultaneously attacking the condition of Tamil. The contradiction becomes less pronounced when his philosophy is examined. He did not regard a language as something sacred that had to be preserved unchanged. He asked whether it was capable of expressing the knowledge required by a modern society. For him, a language that possessed an ancient literary inheritance but remained poorly equipped for science, technology, rational philosophy and modern education had failed its contemporary users.

His most controversial formulation appeared repeatedly in his writings, particularly during the 1960s. In Thamizhum Thamizharum (Tamil and the Tamils) and in editorials in Viduthalai, including an important statement of 11 October 1967, Periyar described Tamil as “kaatumiraandi mozhi”, generally translated as “barbarian” or “savage language.” The statement was deliberately provocative. His argument was that Tamil’s celebrated age—often presented as evidence of superiority—could equally be interpreted as evidence that its speakers had failed to modernise it sufficiently. He objected to what he regarded as an uncritical worship of antiquity.

His reasoning was explicit: if Tamil was claimed to be years old, then merely celebrating that antiquity did not demonstrate contemporary intellectual achievement. The relevant question was whether Tamil had developed the vocabulary and literature necessary for the modern world. He complained that no sufficient effort had been made to reform Tamil and develop it as a language of modern knowledge. Read More

The intensity of this criticism sometimes became extreme. Periyar attacked Tamil scholars and literary custodians for what he regarded as their failure to produce material capable of advancing society. He ridiculed the World Tamil Conference, at one point describing it as a “census to enumerate fools.” An earlier 1943 statement is also associated with his argument that learning Tamil would not even help a beggar obtain alms, meaning that time spent acquiring a language should be judged by its practical usefulness. Such statements belong to the deliberately abrasive rhetorical style for which Periyar became famous.

Yet Periyar’s criticism was not simply directed against Tamil as a spoken language. He objected to the social and intellectual contents associated with portions of Tamil literary culture. Classical texts, devotional literature and traditional commentaries could, in his interpretation, reproduce caste hierarchy, religious superstition and gender inequality. He therefore subjected even celebrated works to scrutiny. The Tirukkural, Silappathikaram and other elements of classical Tamil culture were not exempt from his rationalist examination.

His attack on linguistic antiquarianism was closely connected with his opposition to Sanskrit. Periyar interpreted Sanskrit not merely as another classical language but as a major vehicle of the religious and social authority he associated with the imaginary Brahminical system. Sanskrit’s association with the Vedas, ritual learning and traditional priesthood made it, in his political analysis, an instrument through which social distinctions were maintained. He therefore supported the reduction of Sanskritic influence in Tamil and was sympathetic to attempts to create a more accessible and modern Tamil vocabulary.

The distinction between Tamil, Sanskrit, Hindi and English is central to understanding his position. He criticised Tamil because he considered it insufficiently modernised; he opposed Sanskrit because he associated it with inherited religious and caste authority; he opposed compulsory Hindi because he regarded it as a vehicle of North Indian cultural and political domination; and he favoured English because he regarded it as the most effective existing medium for science, higher education, international knowledge and social mobility.

The Hindi question transformed language from a literary issue into a major political struggle. In 1926, Periyar wrote in Kudi Arasu against the promotion of Hindi, questioning why non-Hindi-speaking people should be required to learn another Indian language when English already provided access to wider knowledge. The decisive confrontation came after the Madras Presidency government under C. Rajagopalachari introduced compulsory Hindi education in 1937. Periyar and the Self-Respect and Justice Party movements organised opposition. The agitation of 1937–1940 involved demonstrations, picketing, imprisonment and the participation of women and students. The deaths of Thalamuthu and Natarajan became enduring symbols of the anti-Hindi movement. The compulsory policy was withdrawn in 1940.

Thus Periyar’s position cannot be described simply as “Tamil first.” His actual hierarchy was different. Human equality came before linguistic pride; rationalism came before literary reverence; modern knowledge came before antiquity. He could defend Tamil-speaking society against Hindi imposition while simultaneously telling Tamil speakers that Tamil itself required radical reconstruction.

The most concrete evidence of this reformist position was his work on the Tamil script. From the 1930s, Periyar began introducing simplified letter forms in publications such as Kudi Arasu. His concern was practical: printing, typesetting, handwriting, literacy and mass education. He regarded complicated traditional forms as obstacles when simpler forms could communicate the same sounds. He compared linguistic reform with the broader modernising transformations occurring elsewhere, including Mustafa Kemal Atatürk’s script reforms in Turkey.

Periyar’s script reform therefore represented the practical side of an otherwise destructive-sounding linguistic criticism. He did not merely say that Tamil was backward; he attempted to alter the written mechanism through which Tamil was transmitted. The reform programme sought fewer complications, easier printing and greater accessibility. Several simplified forms associated with Periyar were subsequently incorporated into official Tamil orthographic practice by the Government of Tamil Nadu in 1978, during the birth-centenary year of Periyar, under Chief Minister M.G. Ramachandran.

Periyar’s relationship with English was equally significant. He considered English a practical gateway to global science and modern institutions. In his later writings, he repeatedly expressed anguish that Tamil had not developed into a comparable language of science and rationalism. In a statement dated 27 January 1969, he went so far as to propose English as the common language of government and public advancement while retaining the mother tongue in Tamil homes. His advocacy was therefore not an emotional admiration of British culture; it was a utilitarian theory of linguistic power. He believed that mastery of English could break traditional monopolies over knowledge and provide non-Brahmin and oppressed communities with access to education, administration and professional employment.

This also explains why Periyar could recommend English education while remaining one of the strongest opponents of Hindi imposition. To him, the issue was not simply which language was Indian. The decisive question was what social function a language performed. English could function as a common international medium without requiring Tamil speakers to submit to another Indian regional language. Hindi, in his political interpretation, risked transferring cultural and administrative power towards the Hindi-speaking North.

Periyar’s position subsequently became complicated by the development of Dravidian cultural nationalism. In 1944, the Justice Party and Self-Respect Movement were reorganised as the Dravidar Kazhagam under his leadership. In 1949, C.N. Annadurai and his followers separated from Periyar and established the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK). The DMK inherited Periyar’s anti-caste, anti-Hindi and social-justice politics but developed a substantially more affirmative public celebration of Tamil language, literature and Tamil antiquity.

This produced a lasting ideological distinction between Periyarism and later Dravidian Tamil identity. Periyar’s followers continued to emphasise his rationalist demand that Tamil should become an instrument of modern knowledge, whereas later political movements increasingly presented Tamil itself as a central component of collective identity. Consequently, Periyar’s harsh descriptions of Tamil remain controversial precisely because they sit beside his enormous historical influence on Tamil public life.

His legacy therefore contains two apparently opposing linguistic movements: defence of Tamil against external domination and criticism of Tamil from within. The first produced opposition to compulsory Hindi, resistance to Sanskritic cultural dominance and the political assertion of Tamil-speaking society. The second produced script reform, attacks on linguistic romanticism and advocacy of English and scientific education.

Periyar’s fundamental linguistic proposition was ultimately instrumental rather than sacred: a language exists for its speakers, and its value is measured by what it enables them to know, communicate and achieve. He rejected the idea that Tamil’s antiquity alone constituted an argument for its superiority. At the same time, his lifelong use of Tamil, his mass publications, his political speeches, his participation in Tamil-language movements and his attempt to simplify the Tamil script demonstrate that his criticism was directed toward what he regarded as Tamil’s limitations in modern civilisation, rather than toward the mere existence of the Tamil language.

The social significance of Periyar and Tamil lies in this unresolved tension between language as heritage and language as technology of civilisation. Tamil nationalists could celebrate its antiquity; Periyar demanded its modernisation. Hindi proponents could describe Hindi as a national link language; Periyar saw compulsory Hindi as political domination. Sanskrit traditionalists could defend classical learning; Periyar saw Sanskritic authority as part of inherited hierarchy. English could be condemned as colonial; Periyar treated it as a practical instrument for science, mobility and intellectual emancipation.

Also Read

• Tamil Nadu Tourism & Hotel Industry
• Tamil Nadu State Acts
• Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) of C. Joseph Vijay

---

Periyar and Tamil Language — Sarvarthapedia Conceptual Knowledge Web

I. Central Node: Periyar E.V. Ramasamy

Periyar

→ Indian National Congress
→ Dravidian Movement
→ Tamil Linguistic Politics
→ Anti-Brahmin Politics
→ Rationalism
→ Atheism
→ Social Reform
→ Anti-Hindi Agitation
→ English as Modern Knowledge Language
→ Tamil Script Reform
→ Dravidian Identity
→ Atlas of Self-sabotage

II. Tamil Language as the Central Cultural Node

Tamil Language

→ Rishi Agastya
→ Tamil Culture
→ Tamil Literature
→ Cilappatikaram (5th to 6th century CE)
→ Ramavataram (12th century CE)
→ Tamil grammar (Agathiyam)
→ Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence
→ Madras State (1950 to 1969)
→ Anti-Hindi Politics
→ Indian Nationalism

Tamil Antiquity

→ Sangam Literature
→ Classical Tamil
→ Damirica (The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea)
→ Damila (Damiladeśa) 1st Century CE
→ Tolkappiyam (c. 2nd Century BCE)

• Purananuru (Sangam Literature
• Silappatikaram (c. 5th Century CE)
• Manimekalai
• Pandyan kings (The Sentinels of the Moon > Chandravamsa)
• Thiruvilayadal Puranam
• The Chalukyas (Somavamsa)
• Nilagunda Plates

Periyar’s Critique of Antiquity

→ Antiquity ≠ Modernity
→ Literary Heritage ≠ Social Progress
→ Language as Instrument
→ Scientific Vocabulary
→ Modern Education
→ Rational Discourse

III. Tamil Culture and Dravidian Identity

Tamil Culture

→ Chola dynasty
→ Rajendra Chola I (1014 CE to 1044 CE)
→ The Thiruvalangadu Copper Plates (Rajendra Chola I)
→ The Anbil Copper Plates (Sundara Chola)
→ King Shibi (Sembiyan)
→ Vande Mataram Song

• Jambudvīpa
• Jambudvīpa-prajñapti (Jain Text)
• Dakkhinapatha (deep south)
• Adi Shankaracharya
• Sringeri Sharada Peetham (Karnataka)
• Kanchipuram in Tamil Nadu
• The Migration of Bhadrabahu (3rd century BCE) to Shravanabelagola (Karnataka)
• Kamba Ramayanam (the 12th-century Tamil epic by poet Kamban)
• Sthala puranas (temple histories)
• Rameswaram (Ramanathaswamy)
• Devipattinam
• Vedaranyam (Thirumaraikadu)
• Darabhasayanam (Thirupullani)
• The Kashi-Rameswaram Yatra
• Pandyan princess Chitrangada (Mahabharata)

Dravidian Identity

→ Dravidian Languages
→ Tamil–Telugu–Kannada–Malayalam Relationship
→ Fraudulent Aryan–Dravidian Theory
→ Arthur Macleane (“Aryan” and “Dravidian” division)
→ Self-Respect Movement
→ Dravidar Kazhagam
→ DMK

Tamil Particularism

→ Tamil Language
→ Tamil Territory
→ Tamil Cultural Autonomy
→ Dravidian Political Consciousness
→ Critique of Indian Nationalism

IV. Colonial Knowledge and the Dravidian Idea

Colonial Linguistics

→ Comparative Philology
→ Dravidian Language Family
→ Aryan–Dravidian Linguistic Distinction
→ European Orientalism
→ European Invasion in India

Robert Caldwell

→ Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian Languages (1856)
→ Dravidian Linguistic Classification
→ Tamil–Sanskrit Distinction
→ Modern Dravidian Intellectual Vocabulary

Christian Missionary Activities in Tamil Nadu

→ Dravidian Linguistics
→ Comparative Religion
→ Colonial Knowledge Production
→ Dalit Theology
→ Dravidian Identity Discourse

Colonial Knowledge → Dravidian Politics

→ Linguistic Classification
→ Historical Reconstruction
→ Aryan–Dravidian Opposition
→ Non-Brahmin Politics
→ Periyar’s Radical Reinterpretation

V. Indian Civilisational Framework

Indian Civilisation

→ Sanskrit Tradition
→ Vedic Interpretation
→ Hindu Religious Culture
→ Pan-Indian Cultural Networks
→ Regional Civilisations
→ Indian Nationalism

Periyar’s Critique

→ Anti-Brahminism
→ Anti-Sanskritism
→ Anti-Hindu Orthodoxy
→ Anti-Caste Politics
→ Rejection of Religious Authority
→ Critique of Pan-Indian Nationalism

India vs Dravidian Identity

→ Indian Nationalism
↔ Tamil Dravidian Regionalism

→ Pan-Indian Cultural Unity
↔ Tamil/Dravidian Cultural Autonomy

→ Sanskritic Cultural Framework
↔ Dravidian Linguistic Framework

→ North Indian Political Dominance
↔ South Indian Regional Assertion

VI. Sanskrit–Tamil Relationship

Sanskrit

→ Vedas
→ Classical Indian Learning
→ Brahminical Institutions
→ Religious Authority
→ Sanskritisation

Periyar’s Interpretation of Sanskrit

→ Caste Hierarchy
→ Brahminical Authority
→ Religious Orthodoxy
→ Aryan Cultural Dominance

Tamil–Sanskrit Conflict

→ Vocabulary
→ Literary Tradition
→ Religious Terminology
→ Cultural Authority
→ Language Purification

VII. Hindi and Tamil

Hindi

→ Hindi Imposition Question
→ Official Language Policy
→ North Indian Cultural Influence
→ Centralisation
→ Language Politics

Anti-Hindi Agitation

→ Madras Presidency, 1937
→ C. Rajagopalachari Government
→ Compulsory Hindi Education
→ Self-Respect Movement
→ Periyar
→ Justice Party
→ 1937–1940 Agitation
→ Thalamuthu and Natarajan
→ Withdrawal of Compulsory Hindi, 1940

Anti-Hindi Politics

→ Tamil Linguistic Rights
→ Federalism
→ Regional Autonomy
→ Dravidian Politics
→ DMK Language Politics

VIII. English as the Alternative Modernity

English

→ Modern Science
→ Higher Education
→ Global Knowledge
→ Administrative Mobility
→ Social Mobility
→ International Communication

Periyar’s English Preference

→ English vs Tamil Modernisation
→ English vs Hindi
→ English vs Sanskrit
→ Scientific Knowledge
→ International English Testing System
→ Modern Education

English as Colonial Modernity

→ British Civil Service
→ Western Education
→ European Science
→ Secular Knowledge
→ Modern Institutions

English and Periyarism

→ Colonial Language
↔ Post-Colonial Utility

→ European Modernity
↔ Indian Traditional Order

→ Scientific Knowledge
↔ Traditional Religious Learning

IX. Tamil Reform Rather Than Tamil Worship

Tamil Script Reform

→ Periyar’s Publications
→ Kudi Arasu
→ 1930s Reform Efforts
→ Simplified Letter Forms
→ Printing Technology
→ Mass Literacy
→ 1978 Tamil Nadu Government Adoption

Language as Technology

→ Script
→ Printing
→ Literacy
→ Education
→ Scientific Vocabulary
→ Mass Communication

Language as Heritage

→ Antiquity
→ Literature
→ Cultural Memory
→ Identity
→ Civilisational Continuity

Language as Technology ↔ Language as Heritage

→ Periyar’s Central Linguistic Conflict

X. Self-Respect Movement

Self-Respect Movement, 1925

→ Anti-Caste
→ Rationalism
→ Atheism
→ Women’s Rights
→ Self-Respect Marriage
→ Anti-Brahminism
→ Tamil Political Mobilisation

Kudi Arasu

→ Tamil Political Journalism
→ Social Reform
→ Anti-Caste Propaganda
→ Language Reform
→ Dravidian Political Vocabulary

Viduthalai

→ Periyar’s Later Political Writing
→ Language Debate
→ Anti-Hindi Politics
→ Tamil Criticism
→ English Advocacy

XI. Periyar’s Concept of Rationalism

Rationalism

→ Anti-Superstition
→ Atheism
→ Scientific Temper
→ Criticism of Scripture
→ Criticism of Tradition
→ Social Equality

Rationalism → Language

→ No Sacred Language
→ No Immutable Script
→ No Automatic Authority of Antiquity
→ Language Must Serve Society

Rationalism → Culture

→ Tradition Subject to Criticism
→ Literature Subject to Criticism
→ Religion Subject to Criticism
→ Caste Subject to Destruction

XII. Tamil Literature and Periyar

Classical Tamil Literature

→ Sangam Corpus
→ Tirukkural
→ Silappathikaram
→ Bhakti Literature
→ Tamil Cultural Canon

Periyar’s Literary Criticism

→ Anti-Superstition
→ Anti-Caste Interpretation
→ Anti-Patriarchal Interpretation
→ Rejection of Literary Sanctity

Tirukkural

→ Tamil Ethical Tradition
→ Secular Interpretation
→ Periyar’s Selective Appreciation
→ Conflict with Traditional Commentary

Silappathikaram

→ Tamil Epic Tradition
→ Tamil Cultural Nationalism
→ Periyar’s Criticism

XIII. Tamil Revivalism

Maraimalai Adigal

→ Pure Tamil Movement
→ Tanittamil
→ Reduction of Sanskrit Vocabulary
→ Tamil Religious Revival
→ Tamil Cultural Nationalism

Pure Tamil Movement

→ Tamil Linguistic Purification
→ Sanskrit Loanwords
→ Tamil Vocabulary
→ Tamil Identity

Pure Tamil ↔ Periyar

→ Common Anti-Sanskrit Direction
→ Different Philosophical Foundations

Pure Tamil Movement
→ preservation and purification of Tamil identity

Periyarism
→ social revolution and rational reconstruction of Tamil society

XIV. European and Christian Intellectual Context

European Modernity

→ Science
→ Rationalism
→ Secularism
→ Individualism
→ Modern Education
→ Political Reform

Christian Missionary Scholarship

→ Tamil Philology
→ Dravidian Linguistics
→ Comparative Religion
→ Colonial Knowledge
→ Dravidian Historical Consciousness

Missionary Scholarship → Caldwell

→ Dravidian Language Family
→ Aryan–Dravidian Linguistic Distinction

Caldwell → Later Dravidian Discourse

→ Linguistic Difference
→ Cultural Difference
→ Historical Difference
→ Political Difference

Important Historical Distinction

Missionary contribution to Dravidian linguistic scholarship
↔ Periyar’s later political appropriation of Dravidian identity

This should not automatically be converted into the proposition that Periyar was an agent of the Christian Church. The historical network supports a more precise inquiry into colonial knowledge, missionary philology and the later political transformation of those categories.

XV. Periyar → Dravidar Kazhagam

Dravidar Kazhagam, 1944

→ Self-Respect Movement
→ Justice Party
→ Dravidian Identity
→ Anti-Caste Politics
→ Anti-Hindi Politics
→ Dravidistan

Dravidistan

→ Dravidian Nationalism
→ Regional Sovereignty
→ Anti-Centralisation
→ Critique of Indian Nationalism

XVI. Periyar → Annadurai → DMK

C.N. Annadurai

→ Periyar’s Political Heir
→ 1949 DMK Formation
→ Electoral Dravidianism
→ Tamil Cultural Nationalism
→ Anti-Hindi Politics

Periyar ↔ Annadurai

→ Self-Respect
→ Dravidian Identity
→ Anti-Hindi Politics

But:

Periyar
→ radical rationalism
→ severe criticism of Tamil tradition
→ preference for English

Annadurai / DMK
→ electoral politics
→ affirmative Tamil identity
→ Tamil literary-cultural mobilisation

XVII. The Central Historical Paradox

Periyar and Tamil

Tamil as Mother Tongue
↔ Tamil as Political Identity

Tamil as Political Identity
↔ Tamil as Object of Criticism

Tamil Antiquity
↔ Modernisation

Tamil Culture
↔ Rationalist Destruction of Traditional Authority

Tamil Autonomy
↔ English Modernity

Anti-Hindi
↔ Pro-English

Anti-Sanskrit
↔ Tamil Purification

Dravidian Identity
↔ Indian National Identity

XVIII. Core Sarvarthapedia Knowledge Chain

Colonial Philology

→ Caldwell
→ Dravidian Linguistic Classification
→ Aryan–Dravidian Distinction
→ Tamil Revivalism
→ Non-Brahmin Movement
→ Periyar
→ Self-Respect Movement
→ Dravidar Kazhagam
→ Dravidian Nationalism
→ DMK
→ Modern Tamil Political Identity

XIX. Counter-Chain: Indian Civilisational Continuity

Vedic Civilisation

→ Sanskrit
→ Tamil–Sanskrit Interaction
→ Agamic Tradition
→ Bhakti
→ Temple Culture
→ Sangam–Post-Sangam Cultural Development
→ Pan-Indian Sacred Geography
→ Regional Civilisations within Indian Civilisation

Periyar’s Challenge

→ Rejection of Sacred Authority
→ Anti-Sanskritism
→ Anti-Brahminism
→ Dravidian Historical Reconstruction
→ Tamil Cultural Autonomy

XX. Final Knowledge Web

Periyar

→ Tamil Language
→ Tamil Culture
→ Tamil Identity
→ Dravidian Identity
→ Self-Respect
→ Rationalism
→ Atheism
→ Anti-Caste
→ Anti-Brahminism
→ Anti-Sanskrit
→ Anti-Hindi
→ Pro-English
→ Script Reform
→ Colonial Modernity
→ Dravidian Nationalism
→ Critique of Indian Nationalism

Tamil

→ Language
→ Literature
→ Script
→ Sangam Tradition
→ Tamil Revivalism
→ Pure Tamil
→ Tamil Nationalism
→ Dravidian Politics

India

→ Indian Civilisation
→ Sanskrit
→ Vedic Tradition
→ Hindu Cultural Continuity
→ Pan-Indian Identity
→ Indian Nationalism

The Historical Tension

↔ Dravidian Political Identity
↔ Indian Civilisational Identity
↔ European Modernity
↔ Colonial Rule in India
↔ Christian healing crusades
↔ Crypto-Christian in Tamil Nadu

• Article 25 of the Constitution
• Tamil Nadu anti-conversion law
• Foreign Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA)

This Sarvarthapedia network makes Periyar and Tamil a gateway article rather than an isolated biography: the reader can move from Tamil → Dravidian → Caldwell → Colonial Philology → Periyar → Self-Respect → Anti-Hindi → English → Indian Nationalism → Indian Civilisation, and then return through Tamil Nadu Politics → Pure Tamil → Tamil Literature → Tamil Cultural Ego → DMK.

---