Caste in Singapore

The caste system, deeply rooted in the social fabric of the Tamil community in India, has long been a defining aspect of identity and social order. Brought to Singapore by early Tamil immigrants in the 19th century, this system initially mirrored the rigid stratification and occupational divisions found in their homeland. However, over time, extensive transformations occurred due to reformist movements, the interventions of the Japanese Occupation, and the socio-economic changes following Singapore's Independence. While caste distinctions have diminished in modern Singapore, remnants of the system persist, subtly manifesting in cultural practices and identity.

Though the caste system had its ancient origins in occupational divisions and inter-caste mobility, the modern caste system has ossified into an immutable structure. It has become a system of rigid stratification characterised by hereditary roles, endogamy, hierarchy, and vertical immobility. One becomes part of a particular caste by birth, not by choice.

Thousands of castes and their sub-castes exist within the South Asian Tamil community. Many of these identities were naturally brought to Singapore with the immigration that began in the early 19th century. For instance, Naraina Pillai, often referred to as a pioneer Tamil settler in Singapore, may have belonged to the ‘Pillai’ caste. In the olden days, it was customary for men from many castes to use their caste name as a surname; however, this practice gradually disappeared around the mid-to-late 20th century.

In early Singapore, the practices of untouchability and segregation in social interactions closely resembled those in the settlers' places of origin. As a result, before World War II, several accounts document the prevention of Adi-Dravidas -- people from castes considered the lowest in the caste hierarchy -- from entering temples, using common utensils in coffee shops and toddy shops, and even limiting where they could wear headgear and footwear. They were not allowed to wear them in the presence of people of higher castes as a sign of respect.

Given that in India, caste has long been closely tied to traditional occupations, the same trend largely continued in early Singapore. For example, the Kammalars worked in carpentry and jewellery making, the Chettiars were financiers, the Vellalars served as accountants to the Chettiars, the Konars and Gounders reared cattle and drove bullock carts, and the Vannars took to the laundry business. Even in institutions such as the then-colonial Municipality, where all Indian labourers were collectively seen as ‘coolies,’ unofficial divisions of labour persisted. A researcher observed that while Adi-Dravidas were assigned to night-soil removal and road-sweeping, others in the same unit might be employed as anti-malarial chemical sprayers or cable layers. Non-Adi-Dravidas often sought to avoid occupations that paralleled those held by Adi-Dravidas in their home villages.

In terms of settlement patterns, almost all Indian enclaves had specific areas or houses designated as Adi-Dravida zones. For example, the area between Jalan Besar and Rochor Canal was the Adi-Dravida zone, while Serangoon Road and its adjoining roads were for others. Even as late as the late 1970s, Lorong Lalat, off Jalan Besar, was commonly referred to as the Street of Paraiyars, as reported in a research thesis. Paraiyar is one of the major communities of Adi-Dravidas, along with Pallar, Chakkiliyar, and others. Similarly, in the Tanjong Pagar area, Adi-Dravidas occupied only one side of Anson Road, while the other side was mainly for Gounders.

Two major forces led to early changes in the attitude of Singaporean Tamils towards caste: reformist movements championed by organisations such as the Tamils Reform Association (TRA) in the 1930s, and the Japanese Occupation in the 1940s. TRA encouraged inter-caste and inter-race marriages while radically altering wedding rituals by eliminating the presence of Brahmins, who are considered the highest in the caste hierarchy. TRA's advocacy was effective in portraying dignity and self-respect as outcomes of rejecting the caste system. Some community leaders, such as G Sarangapany and A C Suppiah, avoided using their caste as surnames, defying the norms of their time. Sarangapany, true to his preaching against endogamy, married a Chinese Peranakan woman in 1937.

When the Japanese occupied Singapore between 1942 and 1945, the Tamil community, like others, was forced into a struggle for survival, experiencing intense suffering regardless of caste hierarchy. For instance, before the war, labourers from the same caste typically gathered in small groups during meal breaks. However, for reasons of discipline and efficiency, the Japanese made all of them sit together for meals and harshly punished those who disobeyed. Such lived experiences are said to have gradually weakened the caste system. After the war, Singapore’s temples began opening their doors to all castes, a practice that has not been universally accepted even in Tamil Nadu, the homeland of Tamils.

Interestingly, as public caste discrimination diminished significantly, at least 10 Adi-Dravida organisations were officially registered after the war, from the late 1940s through the early 1960s. These included the Chidambaram Taluk Maha Jana Association (1949), Karambakkudi Thiruvalluvar Tamil Promotion Association (1952), Adi-Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (1953), Mannarkudi and Thiruthuraipoondi Adi-Dravida Sangam (1953), Mayavaram Taluk Tamils Unity Association (1954), Pattukkotai Orathanadu Taluk Adi-Dravida Munnetra Sangam (1954), Gopalapuram Social Reform Association (1958), and Kovilangulam Adi-Tamilar Samuga Munnetra Sangam (1959). The reasons for the emergence of these organisations within such a short period are not clear. One hypothesis suggests that the government mandated all functioning organisations to register in order to control camouflaged Communist activities.

With Singapore's independence in 1965, there was a dramatic shift in public perceptions and practices regarding the caste system. Public housing by the government had no place for caste.  Social mobility occurred through meritocracy. Economic progress reached people regardless of caste. As a result, by the mid-1970s, most of the Adi-Dravida organisations found that their mission was fulfilled by other means and thus became inactive or focused solely on collecting funds to support the upliftment of their people in ancestral villages in India. Some organisations morphed from being caste-based groups into ones promoting the Tamil language. For example, the Karambakkudi Thiruvalluvar Tamil Promotion Association passed a resolution to drop its village name, severing its former identity, and changing its name to the Thiruvalluvar Tamil Promotion Association. Some others, such as the Mudi Thiruthuvor Sangam (1963-1973), made up of the caste of hairdressers, either became defunct or intentionally changed their identities.

On the other hand, several organisations of castes considered relatively ‘higher’ in the hierarchy, such as the Singapore Dakshina Bharatha Brahmana Sabha (1924) for Brahmins, Singai Namakkal Sangam (1948) for Kongu Vellalar Gounders, Yathavar Association (1953) for Konars and Idaiyars, Nagarathar Association Singapore (2003) for Nattukkottai Chettiars, KINDS Family (Kallar International Development Society Family, 2011) for Kallars, and Poigai Narpani Mandram (2014) for caulkers known as Kalapathukarargal have survived and thrived. Unlike the Adi-Dravida communities and other “lower” castes, members of the other castes in Singapore generally appear reluctant to give up their caste identity.

Overall, caste distinctions have declined in Singapore since the late 20th century. In sociological surveys conducted in Singapore in the 1970s, many respondents already indicated that, with reference to their children’s potential spouses, economic and occupational status were of far greater importance to them than caste. Today, caste in Singapore largely remains a family affair, influencing preferences for certain cultural practices and deity worship.

However, some have observed a renewed interest in preserving caste within the Tamil community -- not in its earlier discriminatory sense, but as a response to globalisation and the fear of cultural erosion. An influx of Indians from India since the 2000s has revived caste practices that had been dormant, such as rites of passage for boys and girls, pre-wedding and post-wedding rituals, and special prayers for caste deities. Some hold the view that caste can be solely about sub-ethnic identity rather than a hierarchical system of discrimination and injustice. Yet, as the caste system is highly adaptive and evolves in response to different social contexts and situations, concerns have risen about the revival of the system in Singapore.



For more information
Mani, A. The Changing Caste-Structure Amongst the Singapore Indians. Master’s thesis, Department of Sociology, University of Singapore, 1977. Unpublished.
Solomon, John. A Subaltern History of the Indian Diaspora in Singapore: The Gradual Disappearance of Untouchability 1872–1965. London and New York: Routledge, 2016.
Sinha, Vineeta. “Sojourning with Muṉīsvaraṉ the ‘Railway God.’” In Temple Tracks: Labour, Piety and Railway Construction in Asia, 1st ed., vol. 16, 199–236. New York: Berghahn Books, 2023. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.9891561.12 
Sinha, Vineeta. “Unraveling ‘Singaporean Hinduism’: Seeing the Pluralism Within.” International Journal of Hindu Studies 14, no. 2/3 (December 2010): 253–279.
Koh, Jaime. “Tamil Community,” Singapore Infopedia. Accessed 11 June 2025. https://www.nlb.gov.sg/main/article-detail?cmsuuid=7cf8b115-d8bd-492a-825b-8aa47235dadd 
Koh, Jaime. “Chettiars,” Singapore Infopedia. Accessed 11 June 2025. https://www.nlb.gov.sg/main/article-detail?cmsuuid=013561b0-95db-445e-b5f4-1aac8b04fdf1
Murthy, Vidya. “Singapore Indians, a brief note.” IIAS Newsletter 49, Autumn 2008, 22-23. https://www.iias.asia/sites/iias/files/nwl_article/2019-05/IIAS_NL49_2223.pdf 
“Once Upon a Time in Little India,” RootsSG, Accessed 11 June 2025. https://www.roots.gov.sg/en/stories-landing/stories/Once-Upon-a-Time-in-Little-India
Chandralekha. “Casteism in Singapore,” The Lipstick Laddoo Lekha Blog, 19 December 2020. https://lipstickladdoolekhablog.wordpress.com/2020/12/19/casteism-in-singapore/ 
Ashvin Parameswaran, and Rodney Sebastian. “Who Is a Brahmin in Singapore?” Modern Asian Studies 41, no. 2 (2007): 253–86. http://www.jstor.org/stable/4132352 

To read in Tamil

Return to home page

About the Encyclopedia

The information in this article is valid as of August 2025 and correct as far as we are able to ascertain from our sources. It is not intended to be an exhaustive or complete history of the subject. If you have any feedback on this article, please submit here.