Page 163 - DSOC201_SOCIAL_STRUCTURE_AND_SOCIAL_CHANGE_ENGLISH

Social Structure and Social Change

Notes Majumdar does not consider numerical strength as a decisive factor in the formation of a dominant
caste. Historically, “Indian villages probably never exercised majority rule or accepted majority
verdict. The feudal India did not compromise with numerical strength. Besides, alone-Brahmin, a
sadhu, a jamindar, alone social worker—each has exercised more influence than a numerically
preponderant community in the village”. Majumdar denies the idea that scheduled castes and
scheduled tribes, though, having numerical strength may occupy a status of dominant caste.
According to him, “the backward classes, scheduled castes preponderate in many villages, even a
particular caste like the Lodha or the Pasi may be numerically the largest caste in a village, but
authority and importance may attach to the few upper castes families, or to the jamindar family,
i.e., the social matrix of India village”.
Thus, on one hand, it is argued that numerical strength has ceased to be a factor in the making of
a dominant caste while it is also held on the basis of empirical strength that the modern forces of
democracy and development including the improvement of the status of scheduled groups have
gone a long way in making a group dominant in a village.
3. Dominant caste is a part of structuralist approach
Most of the criticism labelled against the dominant caste is that of those theorists who oppose
structuralist approach in the study of Indian society. Louis Dumont is the leader of this approach.
M.N. Srinivas, while giving the concept of dominant caste, also follows the line of a structuralist.
Srinivas stands far hierarchy, i.e., the opposition between pure and impure. He looks at the pure
caste, namely, Brahmins and Rajputs as the higher castes in the caste system, he has taken upper
caste view in the construction of dominant caste. This perspective of Srinivas has been criticised
by Edmund Leach. In fact, Srinivas has overlooked the force of history when he writes:
Historical data are neither as accurate nor as rich and detailed as the data collected by field
anthropologists, and the study of certain existing processes in the past.
The making of a dominant caste, thus, is highly empirical and does not take into consideration the
forces of history. A cursory view of the contemporary rural India would immediately show that
much of the relevance of dominant caste has fallen into erosion. As a matter of fact, there has been
sea-change in the social reality of Indian villages that much cannot be comprehended with the
help of this concept. The reservation given to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes, the
intensification of democratisation, and the introduction of Panchayati Raj through 73rd amendment
to Indian Constitution have gone a long way in shrinking the influence of dominant caste. However,
there are some politically dominant groups which have begun to exercise influence on the villagers.
6.6 Inter-Caste and Intra-Caste Relations

Inter-caste Relations
For analyzing the inter-caste relations, castes may be divided into three groups: clean castes (Brahmins,
Rajputs, Kayasths, Jats, etc.), unclean castes (Teli, Dhobi, Nai, Kumhar, Lohar, etc.), and untouchable
castes (Bhangi, Chamar, Pasi, etc). The relations among these castes may be studied at four levels—
commensal relations, marital relations, occupational relations, and social relations. At each level, the
relations maybe perceived as traditional and as changing relations.
Commensal Relations
Commensal relations refer to a caste/person with whom a man will eat. In daily relations, persons
accept food only from the members of their own caste. The question of commensal relations arises
only on occasions of feasts. The usual practice on such occasions is that even though members of
different castes are invited, it does not mean that they take food together. Members of clean castes sit
in one row (pangat), while members of unciean castes occupy another row. Several feet of open ground
are left between the two rows. K.S. Mathur (1964:126-127) has pointed out some exceptions in which
clean and unclean caste members sit in the same row. While the members of clean castes are eating,
the members of untouchable castes will not sit with them. When commensal circle is narrow, dietary
relations are spread to wide area.

158 LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY