From being a palanquin-bearer the Kahar became the regular indoor
servant of Hindu households. Originally of low caste, and derived from
the non-Aryan tribes, they did not object to eat the leavings of food
of their masters, a relation which is naturally very convenient, if
not essential, in poor Hindu houses. Sir H. Risley notes, however, that
in Bengal a Kahar engaged in personal service with a Brahman, Rajput,
Babhan, Kayasth or Agarwal, will only eat his master's leavings so long
as he is himself unmarried. [246] It seems that the marriage feast
may be considered as the sacrificial meal conferring full membership
of the caste, after which the rules against taking food from other
castes must be strictly observed. Slaves were commonly employed as
indoor servants, and hence the term Kahar came to be almost synonymous
with a slave. "In the eighteenth century the title Kahar was at Patna
the distinctive appellation of a Hindu slave, as Maulazadah was of
a Muhammadan, and the tradition in 1774 was that the Kahar slavery
took its rise when the Muhammadans first invaded northern India." [247]
As the Kahar was the common indoor servant in Hindu houses so
apparently he came to be employed in the same capacity by the
English. But he was of too high a caste to serve the food of a
European, which would have involved touching the cooked flesh of
the cow, and thus lost him his comparatively good status and social
purity among the Hindus. Hence arose the anomaly of a body servant
who would not touch his master's food, and confined himself to the
duties of a valet; while the name of bearer given to this servant
indicates clearly that he is the successor of the old-time Kahar
or palanquin-bearer. The Uriya bearers of Bengal were well known as
excellent servants and most faithful; but in time the inconvenience
of their refusal to wait at table has led to their being replaced by
low-caste Madrasis and by Muhammadans. The word 'boy' as applied to
Indian servants is no doubt of English origin, as it is also used in
China and the West Indies; but the South Indian term boyi or Hindi
bhoi for a palanquin-bearer also appears to have been corrupted into
boy and to have made this designation more common. The following
instances of the use of the word 'boy' from Hobson-Jobson [248] may
be quoted in conclusion: "The real Indian ladies lie on a sofa, and
if they drop their handkerchief they just lower their voices and say
'Boy,' in a very gentle tone" (Letters from Madras in 1826). 'Yes,
Sahib, I Christian Boy. Plenty poojah do. Sunday time never no work do'
(Trevelyan, The Dawk Bungalow, in 1866). The Hindu term Bhoi or bearer
is now commonly applied to the Gonds, and is considered by them as an
honorific name or title. The hypothesis thus appears to be confirmed
that the Kahar caste of palanquin-bearers was constituted from the
non-Aryan tribes, who were practically in the position of slaves to
the Hindus, as were the Chamars and Mahars, the village drudges and
labourers. But when the palanquin-bearer developed into an indoor
servant, his social status was gradually raised from motives of
convenience, until he grew to be considered as ceremonially pure, and
able to give his master water and prepare food for cooking. Thus the
Kahars or Dhimars came to rank considerably above the primitive tribes
from whom they took their origin, their ceremonial purity being equal
to that of the Hindu cultivating castes, while the degrading status
of slavery which had at first attached to them gradually fell into
abeyance. And thus one can understand why the Gonds should consider
the name of Bhoi or bearer as a designation of honour.