Caste in India: The Facts and the System c6.s2: I. General Ideas

Caste in India: The Facts and the System c6.s2

Language: English

I. General Ideas

c6.s2.1

WE are inclined, when dealing with social customs foreign to our country and civilization, to judge them by our own standards of conduct; but we must drop this habit when we are discussing India.

Our Western world is enclosed in a network of institutions and laws which leave the least possible margin for the unexpected and for variety and conflict of ideas. India is governed essentially by custom, an authority both tenacious and capricious, and subject to endlessly changing local influences. It is very powerful in its immediate action, and disregards completely the importance of general and dispassionate views. The rule of custom involves complex processes of an unstable and incoherent nature as opposed to those of an ordered simplicity. This springs from the fact that Hindu society, in spite of the years behind it, has down to our own times remained very primitive in type. It has given rise to no state which is comparable even with the narrow government of the cities of antiquity, still less with our modern state. In the absence of all proper political law, the influence, both religious and social, of the Brahmans has found it an easy task, by exercising incessant pressure throughout the centuries, slowly to imprint on the whole a common physiognomy and to reduce below a certain level the most blatant contradictions. It has not effected unity, still less uniformity. It has not even been able to produce national unity, the lack of which is significant and extremely important.

c6.s2.3

The Āryan penetration has taken place gradually and unequally throughout India. It is doubtful whether, even in the north-west, the influx of the conquering race was great enough to overwhelm or completely to absorb the former populations, which were of different origin. In the south the infiltration came later and was more restricted, so that the non-Āryan races form a substantial element throughout India, even if not the major part of the population. In spite of the uniform veneer spread over the whole by the conquering civilization, certain customs, traditions, and tendencies foreign or contrary to it have therefore survived. Even to-day groups of these ancient populations are entering under our very eyes into the general structure of the vast Brahmanic community.

c6.s2.4

It will be foreseen what complications and incoherences so active and unstable a mixture is bound to cause, and how these must be taken into account by any one who wishes for a true and vivid picture of the existing conditions. Even the most general facts are subject to an infinity of exceptions. A systematic exposition would be immense, so vast is the ground to be covered, and any summary is necessarily imperfect, and in a sense fallacious, so varied are the aspects of the question. It is not my business to attempt here either one or the other; but it is necessary at least to try to present the problem clearly.

c6.s2.5

Leaving out of account certain populations definitely inferior by race, isolated by geographical conditions and by history, and secondary in numerical importance, the whole of India appears to us not as a simple collection of individuals, but as a mass of corporate unities. Their numbers, names, character, and functions are infinitely diverse; they form everywhere the invariable and apparently necessary framework of the population. The family-community has been maintained or restored in vast regions; the village-community owes its right of self-government either to traditional custom or, more especially, to the impotence of the central power, which, before the advent of British rule, drew up no wise measures: it was inclined to confine its normal activities to tax-collecting. But I have in view groups less restricted than these. They are not by their nature attached to any definite geographical division; they include many villages, or are involved in the same domain with a multitude of analogous groups. Unequal in number and opposed in customs, they have, however, common traits which place them in the same category: they are distinguished by special names, and meet together in assemblies to confer on certain matters. They isolate themselves sedulously in order to avoid intermarriage and to keep the rule which prohibits any contact or sharing of meals between them. Each is differentiated by his special hereditary occupation. Their jurisdiction keeps watch over the strict observance of the rules sanctioned by tradition. These groups are *castes*—or, it should be added, *quasi-castes*.

c6.s2.6

In reality, all these, in spite of the general resemblance both of the practices they observe and of the machinery by which they are maintained, are profoundly different. Many have entirely local existences, and several have very exceptional laws. The military aristocracy of the Nayars, confined to the coast of Malabar, is founded on polyandry. In the Panjab, where the Muslim conquest and the constant infiltration of foreign elements has reacted perceptibly on the social constitution of the country, large classes—for example, the Pathans and the Baluchis,¹ whose name attests a more or less purely geographical origin—are free from several laws which are essential characteristics of the caste, as properly defined. At another extremity of India, in Bengal, a number of corporate unities, while approximating as closely as they can to the constitution laid down for the caste by Brahmanic precepts, are betrayed either by their name or by the authoritative agreement of all witnesses, as imperfectly assimilated non-Aryan groups. Their inclusion in the scheme of Hindu organization is more or less arbitrary. It is the same everywhere, so that the ideas of tribe and caste are closely connected and sometimes even confused.

c6.s2.7

¹ Denzil Charles Jelf Ibbetson, *Report on the Census of the Panjab* (1881), Calcutta, 1883, v. I, p. 176.

c6.s2.8

It is necessary, however, that we should determine approximately the most general features which characterize caste, in so far as it is possible to trace its lesser branches to a common type.

c6.s2.9

The castes have often been compared—particularly by Hindus of English upbringing, who are very anxious at heart to lessen the distance between our races and theirs and to lower the barriers which separate India from Europe—with the social distinctions that exist amongst us. The gradations among the different castes, varying according to district, but clearly established in each by public feeling, furnish a natural excuse for this comparison. Caste, however, corresponds only very remotely to our social classes. Its constitution is far stronger and its implications far more precise. It is an institution, and an essential one.

c6.s2.10

It embraces not only a very great majority of the population of India, but it forms the normal framework of society, and is intimately connected with its religious life. It has been found possible, therefore, not without apparent justification, to regard it as the very soul of this somewhat indeterminate, fluid collection of customs and beliefs which is called Hinduism. A great many doctrines, more or less heterodox, have arisen which—either in clear theoretical terms, or indirectly by the logic of their teaching—attacked its legitimacy or undermined its foundations. These doctrines have either disappeared or lingered on in obscurity; caste has survived indestructible. Islam, having penetrated into India by main force, has won an important place there. Little by little caste has triumphed over natural opposition and distaste, and has seldom failed to draw the Muslims into its irresistible bonds. It is by adopting the official type of the caste that, even in our own times, the aboriginal populations, which have remained longest outside Hindu civilization, force an entry and claim common rights.

c6.s2.11

In spite of the confusion which is due to inexactitude of speech, there are, properly speaking, no *outcasts* in India. Individuals, driven by various causes from their native caste, quickly form the nucleus of new groups. Two courses only are open to them : either to become members of the lower castes, or to join with companions in misfortune and form new castes. It is obvious that in the normal working of all these exclusive sets there is no possible life for the isolated individual. The Pariah, upon whom, since Bernadin de Saint-Pierre, so much sympathy has been lavished, is not the lonely, banished creature one generally imagines. He belongs to a group, though it may be very poor and much despised. There are Pariah castes which, in spite of the disdain of the Brahmans, are not deterred from holding a high opinion of themselves ; they find neighbours to look down upon.

c6.s2.12

This shows the vast number of these groups of people, castes or tribes analogous to castes. There may be hundreds of them in one province. I have counted more than 120 in the district of Poona alone, which has about 900,000 inhabitants, yet this figure gives only an imperfect idea of the real partition : it represents the number of castes properly so-called. The greater part, however, are split up into subdivisions, which, though they share a generic name and have similar customs, form in several respects, notably in the matter of marriage, so many distinct castes. In this same district of Poona the Brahmans, whom theoretically we have been accustomed to regard as a single caste throughout the whole of India, are really divided up into fifteen castes. Some of them, and those not the most extensive, are themselves split up into several subdivisions, which never intermarry. It is the same everywhere.

c6.s2.13

Surveys, drawn up on the census returns of 1881, record no less than 855 different castes, numbering at least a thousand members or divided amongst several provinces or native states. If we add those which are less numerous or which exist only in one province or in one state, we reach the figure of 1929. But these calculations are far exceeded by the truth. Under a single head are registered nearly 14,000,000 Brahmans, 12,000,000 Kunbis, 11,000,000 Chamars, etc. All these, though claiming the same title, are in reality resolved into a multitude of secondary castes, which form as many autonomous bodies. These last, more often than not, despise each other and refuse as a rule either to intermarry or to eat together. It is, indeed, a characteristic tendency among all the castes to subdivide into more and more multiple groups, like coteries in the same social sphere.

c6.s2.14

The names borne by castes and sub-castes are not always clear in their meaning. Apart from two or three generic and traditional titles, such as those of Brahman and Rajput, the greater number of those whose meaning can be discerned trace their origin to one or other of the following four categories: geographical names borrowed either from a mere locality or from a province; professional names, referring either to an occupation peculiar to the group, or, in the case of some of the Brahman castes, a special feature in their sacerdotal functions—names of objects or of animals particularly connected with the group by traditional legends or religious practices; and lastly, family names going back, either directly or through a nickname, to a supposed ancestor. As may easily be imagined, the castes bearing names which seem to call for explanation are rarely at a loss for legends, however improbable, to account for their origin. In most cases the connexion has to be reversed: it is more usual for the name to have inspired the story than for the story to have given rise to the name.

c6.s2.15

Of such tales those most deserving of belief are undoubtedly the traditions which refer to more or less remote migrations, which are commemorated in the name of the caste. They show that these migrations were very frequent, especially among the higher castes, and are not the less significant for that. National feeling exists hardly at all; life is much more narrowly focused. The community of the caste or the tribe is strong enough in its solidarity and tradition to fulfil all needs. This society constitutes the true fatherland. Under its protection there is little stability, and in the past there was even less. Individuals carried about with them the household gods which they prized most highly; the swarming groups were re-established without difficulty in new surroundings under the permanent influence of the same instincts. India thus appears to us more than ever as an immense complexity of mobile organisms. They are united by widely different factors, amongst which it is at once evident that varieties of origin and race occupy an important position.

c6.s2.16

Is it to the persistence of memories and to the enmities which they awaken that we must trace the dissensions which are perpetuated in many places between various castes? They are all the more striking as the peoples concerned are by nature the more peace-loving. The most lasting and notorious hostility is that which, in the south of India, divides what is called the ‘right hand’ and the ‘left hand’. The two sets correspond roughly, it seems, to a division into artisan and agricultural castes.¹ It has never been possible to explain its origin and history. So much is certain, that their rivalry has been and still is the source of violent quarrels which divide the population into opposing camps. Certain privileges claimed by one or the other ‘hand’, if ever so slightly infringed, kindle the conflict.¹ It has often provoked risings which ‘spreading from place to place, have sown trouble over a wide stretch of territory and given occasion for all kinds of excesses which often end in bloody battles’.

c6.s2.17

¹ Cf. Burnell-Yule, *Hobson Jobson*, s.v. ‘Caste’.

c6.s2.18

¹ Abbé Dubois, *Mœurs*, etc., v. I, pp. 15 et seq.

c6.s2.19

Similar facts, though on a smaller scale, are found in many parts of the country.² Often rival claims to honours give rise, either as cause or pretext, to these struggles. Trivial enough in our eyes, they inflame those concerned to an extra-ordinary degree. The reason is that the organization of the castes has become the foundation of a veritable hierarchy: each one has its particular rank, defined by tradition or public opinion, and each one maintains it at all costs, or strives to advance itself. This is a trait which is entirely characteristic of the general nature of the institution.

c6.s2.20

² E.g. cf. the account ‘Caste Factions’ by Elliot in the *Asiatic Quarterly*, April 1892, pp. 438 et seq.

c6.s2.21

The pivot of this hierarchy is the recognized superiority of the Brahmanic caste and of its numerous branches. Some writers have gone so far as to say that the place assigned to each caste depends essentially on its relation to the Brahmanic caste, on the marks of consideration or disdain which it receives from the latter.¹ In spite of the relative disrepute into which a number of their castes have fallen the Brahmans hold a dominant position almost everywhere.² Their religious ascendancy has assured a high degree of authority to sects which, to a great extent, are founded on religious precepts and prejudices. It is very rarely that their superiority has been disputed.³ Often, however, the struggle among less favoured classes to emulate them has been obstinate and violent. All the castes, even the most despised, are animated by vanity and by a passion to be exclusive, which has strangely embittered these quarrels. Every means, from trickery and corruption to open force, is brought into play by the various groups in order to confirm or acquire such prerogatives as will raise them in public esteem.⁴

c6.s2.22

¹ Jogendra Chandra Ghosh, *Calcutta Review*, October 1880, pp. 81-2; cf. Guru Proshad Sen, ibid., July 1890, pp. 61-5.

c6.s2.23

² E.g. cf. Dubois, op. laud, v. I, pp. 143-4 and 161.

c6.s2.24

³ Cf., however, Dubois, I, 13.

c6.s2.25

⁴ Guru Proshad Sen, *Calcutta Review*, July 1890, pp. 54-5; Stecle, *Hindoo Castes*, pp. 96-7.

c6.s2.26

We have to deal with vast territories, where races differing in origin and habits jostle and mingle with one another; where groups are intermixed and unequally developed; split up *ad infinitum*, are easily changed about, and are sometimes engaged in bitter struggles amongst themselves. Must we therefore abandon the attempt to give a picture of the caste institution as a whole? The attempt cannot indeed fail to be incomplete, but it will not necessarily be false and misleading. Whatever incongruities may be cloaked by the apparent unity of the system, it is really based on many fundamental analogies. It will be enough to remember that no assertion should be regarded as absolute, that the relationship of facts leaves room for a multitude of fine shades of difference, and that only the most general characteristics are common to the whole domain.

c6.s2.27

This being clearly understood, let us picture a corporate group, exclusive and, in theory at least, rigorously hereditary. It possesses a certain traditional and independent organization, a chief and a council, and as occasion demands it meets in assemblies endowed with more or less full authority. Often united in the celebration of certain festivals, it is further bound together by a common profession and by the practice of common customs which bear more especially upon marriage, food, and various cases of impurity. Finally, it is armed, in order to assure its authority, with a jurisdiction of fairly wide extent, capable by the infliction of certain penalties, especially of banishment, either absolute or revocable, enforcing the power of the community. Such, briefly, is the caste system as it appears to us.