Page 162 - DSOC201_SOCIAL_STRUCTURE_AND_SOCIAL_CHANGE_ENGLISH

Unit 6: Caste System in India

Landownership confers not only power but prestige, so much so that, individuals who have made Notes
good in any walk of life tend to invest in land. If landownership is not always an indispensable
passport to high rank, it certainly facilitates upward mobility.
Criticism
The decades of 1950s and 1960s in the field of rural sociology witnessed a keen competition between
those who preferred Redfield’s approach to village studies and Radcliffe-Brown’s analysis of functional
analysis. Despite differences in their approach, both the camps focused on culture. Later on Louis
Dumont stressed the importance of culture and caste as determining variables in the study of Indian
civilisation as a whole.
The concept of ‘dominant caste’, it is argued, has emerged out of the African studies on dominant
class. When Srinivas put forward the concept of dominant caste, it was seriously commented upon
by sociologists and social anthropologists. As a matter of fact, during 1950s and 1960s, the academic
environment in the country, in rural sociology and social anthropology, was charged by studies on
caste and village communities. Some of the criticisms of the concept have relevance even today in our
understanding of rural society. These criticisms are enumerated below:
1. Dominant caste today is found only in traditional villages
Srinivas has argued that a dominant caste has most of the power in the village within its fold. In
fact, it is the dominant caste which runs the village; maintains the village system.
The empirical reality today has undergone vast transformation. Surely, in the past, the powerful
families in the village were the big landowning families. The Brahmins and the Rajputs, in the
earlier periods of history, got immense favour from the feudal lords and the British rulers. In
order to keep these higher castes in favour of the ruling group land was given as gift. Those who
received such favours included Brahmins, Rajputs and the Marathas. Viewed from this perspective
admittedly, the Brahmins and the Rajputs became big landowning castes.
But, with the land reforms including land ceiling and abolition of jamindari and jagirdari, big
landowning has ceased to be a determinant factor of dominant caste. In place of big landholding,
political power has become a decisive factor in the formation of a dominant caste. Andre Beteille
very rightly observes:
The powerful families in the past were the big landowning families. These included the principal
Brahmin families among non-Brahmins, the Maratha family. Today political power whether in
the village or outside it is not as closely tied to ownership of land as it was in the past. New bases
of power have emerged which are, to some extent, independent of both caste and class. Perhaps
most important among these is the strength of numerical support.
D.N. Majumdar, who conducted the study of Monana village of Uttar Pradesh in 1958, observes
that the Brahmin and the Thakur were the dominant castes in Mohana. But, at a later stage, he
finds that the dominance of the Thakur group has begun to be shaken up, ever since the legal
removal of its economic pillar—the jamindari system— which was the strong medium through
which it held the various other castes in a position of economic subordination... But Majumdar
also finds that with the abolition of jamindari, much of the economic power of the Thakur is retained.
He says that “with their wide moneylending business they still are a powerful group”.
If economic power is considered to be an important factor of the formation of a dominant caste, it
is only limited to the traditional villages, such as, that of tribals which have not received the
impact of modern political ‘transformation.
2. Dominant caste is not always numerically a preponderant caste
Yet another criticism of dominant caste falls into two camps. One camp of scholars argues that in
traditional villages it is not the numerical strength but secular power and ritual status that determine
the status of a dominant caste. Among those who stand for this argument include D.N. Majumdar and
others. However, the second group consisting of Andre Beteille, M.N. Srinivas and Yogendra Singh
has advanced the idea of ritual and secular status of a caste as dominant. This group asserts an empirical
evidence that nowadays “with the coming of adult suffrage, numerical strength has become very
important and the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes have assumed a greater importance”.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 157