The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual, Kingship, and Society c16.20

c16.20

In sum, then, Indian society, stripped of the modern state's overlay, is not characterized by exclusive social categories on the one hand and separate cohesive blocks of territory on the other, but by interpenetration as well as dispersion of diverse fractional rights and holdings. This fractional character of rights and holdings not only favors dispersion in widening circles, but equally and more importantly enables the right-holding actors of various descriptions to recombine the fractionized whole through inclusion and interpenetration. The formal instrument for this purpose is the sharing brotherhood—the genealogical formula is a special form of the brotherhood, not necessarily its origin. Being a sharing brother involves the least endangered permanent relationship and thereby the strongest title to the shared object. The formal nature of the initial agreement makes its rules enforceable: “We acknowledge that we had become amenable to the Sarkar (government authorities) by the opposition made to your enjoying the rights of the third share in the headman’s office,” as the document already quoted has it. And, at the same time, it facilitates the resolution of conflict by formally admitting rival claimants to the brotherhood according to a reallotment of the shares.