_Mahar, Mehra, Dhed._--The impure caste of menials, labourers and
village watchmen of the Maratha country, corresponding to the Chamars
and Koris of northern India. They numbered nearly 1,200,000 persons in
the combined Province in 1911, and are most numerous in the Nagpur,
Bhandara, Chanda and Wardha Districts of the Central Provinces,
while considerable colonies are also found in Balaghat, Chhindwara
and Betul. Their distribution thus follows largely that of the
Marathi language and the castes speaking it. Berar contained 400,000,
distributed over the four Districts. In the whole Province this caste
is third in point of numerical strength. In India the Mahars number
about three million persons, of whom a half belong to Bombay. I am not
aware of any accepted derivation for the word Mahar, but the balance
of opinion seems to be that the native name of Bombay, Maharashtra,
is derived from that of the caste, as suggested by Wilson. Another
derivation which holds it to be a corruption of Maha Rastrakuta, and
to be so called after the Rashtrakuta Rajput dynasty of the eighth
and ninth centuries, seems less probable because countries are very
seldom named after ruling dynasties. [110] Whereas in support of
Maharashtra as 'The country of the Mahars,' we have Gujarashtra or
Gujarat, 'the country of the Gujars,' and Saurashtra or Surat, 'the
country of the Sauras.' According to Platts' Dictionary, however,
Maharashtra means 'the great country,' and this is what the Maratha
Brahmans themselves say. Mehra appears to be a variant of the name
current in the Hindustani Districts, while Dheda, or Dhada, is said
to be a corruption of Dharadas or billmen. [111] In the Punjab it is
said to be a general term of contempt meaning 'Any low fellow.' [112]
Wilson considers the Mahars to be an aboriginal or pre-Aryan tribe,
and all that is known of the caste seems to point to the correctness
of this hypothesis. In the _Bombay Gazetteer_ the writer of the
interesting Gujarat volume suggests that the Mahars are fallen Rajputs;
but there seems little to support this opinion except their appearance
and countenance, which is of the Hindu rather than the Dravidian
type. In Gujarat they have also some Rajput surnames, as Chauhan,
Panwar, Rathor, Solanki and so on, but these may have been adopted by
imitation or may indicate a mixture of Rajput blood. Again, the Mahars
of Gujarat are the farmservants and serfs of the Kunbis. "Each family
is closely connected with the house of some landholder or _pattidar_
(sharer). For his master he brings in loads from the fields and cleans
out the stable, receiving in return daily allowances of buttermilk and
the carcases of any cattle that die. This connection seems to show
traces of a form of slavery. Rich _pattidars_ have always a certain
number of Dheda families whom they speak of as ours (_hamara_) and
when a man dies he distributes along with his lands a certain number
of Dheda families to each of his sons. An old tradition among Dhedas
points to some relation between the Kunbis and Dhedas. Two brothers,
Leva and Deva, were the ancestors, the former of the Kunbis, the latter
of the Dhedas." [113] Such a relation as this in Hindu society would
imply that many Mahar women held the position of concubines to their
Kunbi masters, and would therefore account for the resemblance of
the Mahar to Hindus rather than the forest tribes. But if this is
to be regarded as evidence of Rajput descent, a similar claim would
have to be allowed to many of the Chamars and sweepers. Others of the
lowest castes also have Rajput sept names, as the Pardhis and Bhils;
but the fact can at most be taken, I venture to think, to indicate a
connection of the 'Droit de Seigneur' type. On the other hand, the
Mahars occupy the debased and impure position which was the lot of
those non-Aryan tribes who became subject to the Hindus and lived in
their villages; they eat the flesh of dead cattle and this and other
customs appear to point decisively to a non-Aryan origin.