The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c16.2

c16.2

Clearly our systematic knowledge and understanding of the caste phenomenon has made significant advances since the last century, but there remains a nagging doubt. Has not the attention given to caste—so striking for the Western observer—somewhat narrowed our view? The point is that one can study the relevant Indian texts, as well as the voluminous data and secondary literature about caste, without having to recognize the overarching fact that we are dealing with a peasant society and economy and all that this entails. For that reason we turned to the study of the village. In the village, both caste and facts of peasant life should find their natural junction. Thus there appeared, especially in the fifties and sixties of this century, a flood of village monographs. However, these monographs seem in the main to reflect the dominant concern with caste rather than furthering our understanding of Indian peasant society. Moreover, the carefully constructed caste rankings more often than not are at variance with the actual relationships in the village, and the brahmins as such often do not fit in at all. Dominant castes are seen at ceremonial occasions to eat—that is, sitting in the same row—with their low-ranking servants. Members of other peasant castes in the same village keep to themselves and refuse to participate in these exchanges, breaking the unity and cohesiveness of the ranking order.³ Apparently we have to recognize two different orders of facts that impinge on but refuse to be assimilated to each other. And so our understanding remains stuck between the twin poles of caste and the village that have come to monopolize our view of Indian society.