Who makes the Kolhapuri chappal? Amid Prada row, a look at the artisans behind the iconic footwear

The Charmakars

The term ‘Charmakar’, anthropologist Marie-Caroline Saglio-Yatzimirsky writes in Dharavi: From Mega-Slum to Urban Paradigm (2013), is of Sanskrit origin, meaning leather artisan. She notes that although the term comes from the same Sanskrit root as the term ‘Chamar’, commonly used to denote leather worker castes in north India, “the term of Charmakar carries a more local and distinctive connotation.”

In his book Mobilisation of Backward Communities in India (2004), Bhosale writes that Charmakars belong to the Scheduled Caste category in Maharashtra, “ranking third in demographic size, after Mahar and Mang”.

The polluting nature of their occupation, scholars suggest, restricted their mobility and marginalised the Charmakars in the Hindu social order. “[They] identify themselves as Hindus, but orthodox Hindus do not accept complete assimilation of Charmakars in Hindu fold,” writes Bhosale.

This caste group, Bhosale writes in Charmakars in Transition (2006), is mentioned in the Rigveda, in the later Vedic literature, and in the Brahmanas. “The word leather (hide) Charman, charma is known in older and later portions of the Rigveda, Atharveda Veda, and Yajur Vedic schools and in Brahmanas,” he notes.

Across India, however, Charmakars are known by different names. According to Bhosale, they are referred to as Raidas in Uttar Pradesh; Ravidas, Chamar, or Mochi in Bihar; Jatia and Golia in Punjab; Rishidas and Muchi in Tripura; and Jatavs in Delhi as well as other parts of northern India.

The Kolhapuri

The footwear industry in India is divided into two categories: the organised and the unorganised. The Kolhapuri, along with mojari, juttis, and Jaipuris, constitute the second category. The western Indian towns of Kolhapur and Miraj are India’s oldest leather tanning centres. “Twenty-five thousand leather shoemakers belonging to the Chamaar caste of tanners and leather work here,” notes author Jahnvi Lakhota Nandan in Pukka India: 100 Objects That Define India (2017).

In the book Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (2018), academics Urmi Salve and Ganesh Jadhav write that every household in this region contributes to the footwear industry, making at least 35 to 40 pairs of Kolhapuris per week. Describing the cumbersome technique, the scholars list skiving, punching, polishing, pattern cutting, stitching, and assembling as steps involved in the process. This, however, does not include the extra time needed to enhance the aesthetic appeal of the footwear. Some tree seeds are used to add colour, and limestone to smooth the quality of the leather.

According to Nandan, the first Kolhapuri chappal was made in the mid-1970s. Decades later, in 2019, the slipper got a Geographical Indication (GI) tag.

The Kolhapuris (Source: Wikipedia)

“These beige-coloured, flat slippers, that hold the foot in place with one thick decorated instep connected to loop of the big toe with a thong, use the discarded leather pieced together with clay made from a fine-grained black soil taken from the regions’ rice field,” she writes.

This is not the first time that the footwear has gained global popularity. Around the late 1970s, they became known as ‘buffalo sandals’ in America and were similarly cherished across Europe. In the 1990s, Nandan finds, “Fashion’s demand for the latest colours and diverse styles led to the creation of the ‘designer Kolhapuri.’

Concurring, sociologist Suryakant Waghmore says, “Indian footwear has always been exported out of India. The demand is varying from, I think, South Africa, Europe, and even America.”

Yet, Salve and Jadhav warn that the production of the Kolhapuri is a tiring process, requiring meticulous work for long hours. In the process, they find, “female workers occupy apparently various non-optimal postures which may lead to development of musculoskeletal and other occupational disorders”.

The declining tanneries

Bhosale, in his interview, directs attention to the declining tanneries across India. “There are so many challenges leather workers are facing throughout the country,” he says. The Dhors, or tanner castes, are the major suppliers of hides to Charmakars. However, Bhosale found that most hides were being diverted to factories in Kanpur and Chennai, leaving Dhors with little to supply the Charmakars. “This has come as a major threat to the Charmakars’ occupation, leading to only a handful of tanneries in Kolhapur. There are also lesser repairs of leather canvas and foam, with rubber and plastic emerging as viable options,” he says.

Waghmore adds, “They also lack the capital that is needed for mass production. There are these new competitors, smaller industries, and also with better capital worldwide.”

The entry of other caste groups has also displaced the Charmakars. According to Saglio-Yatzimirsky, “Each Charmakar caste lays claim to a particular leather speciality and is averse to those practised by others. It therefore safeguards a professional unit that is also a hierarchical position differentiating it from other castes.”

Other reasons for decline include the competition from multinational brands such as Bata, Adidas and Reebok, which offer similar products at competitive prices, and the resistance from younger generations to join this stigmatised profession. “This is also a seasonal business, you see,” says Bhosale, “you need a good amount of sunlight to dry the hides. Hence, the makers experience a lull period during monsoon.”

Leather tanneries (Source: Professor B.V. Bhosale)

A solution to this loss in business, proposed by Yengde, is a financial incentive for the communities making the Kolhapuri chappal. Waghmore notes that the prices of Kolhapuris are not always in keeping with the dignity that should be attached to the final product. “People are not treated well,” he says.

“What Prada should do as a mark of acknowledging that they have stolen this without even appropriating it,” Yengde asserts, “is transfer the profits that they derive from this to the Sant Rohidas Leather Industries and Leatherworkers Development Corporation.”

Alternatively, the author suggests other ways, including taking up the case with UNESCO, the World Trade Organization (WTO), or the International Labour Organization (ILO). “There are several fights, depending on how seriously we wish to take this,” he says.

A finished product with no stigma

Yengde is not necessarily against allowing the Kolhapuri to reach international users, so long as its Indian makers are remunerated well. “We have always been exchanging ideas, any kind of closeness is not cosmopolitan of our past either,” he says.

“It brings in more attention, and that is good. I think overall the demand, in the long run, should increase for this product,” reckons Waghmore. Yet, he questioned why we have waited so long for a ‘foreign brand’ to take this up. “Maybe the government should do more, the local corporations should do more. What were we doing all these years?” he asks.

Ironically, notes Bhosale with a hint of sarcasm, “the finished products carry no stigma”. The moment the Kolhapuri reaches its final shape, he explains, non-traditional castes are also engaged in its sale, retail and usage.

“But that is the hollow nature of caste. That is the violence of caste. It is not scientific,” sighs Waghmore.