Page 108 - DSOC202_SOCIAL_STRATIFICATION_ENGLISH

Unit 6 : Caste

we find admixture of Hindu religious elements and values in tribal religion and tribal values in Notes
Hindu religion, religion as a single criterion cannot be used to distinguish between a tribe and a
caste. Ghurye, Naik and Bailey have also rejected this criterion.
Using geographical isolation as a criterion of distinction, it is said that the tribals live in
geographically isolated regions like hills and mountains, but Hindus live in plain regions. Due to
lesser contacts with the civilized neighbours, tribals are more uncivilized than the Hindus. It may
be true by and large that tribals live in hills away from the lines of communication but we have
examples which show that many caste Hindus also live in isolated regions and many tribals live
in plains. This means that in addition to a purely geographical isolation, we demand other criteria
also to distinguish a tribe from a caste.
The third criterion is language difference between a tribe and a caste. It is suggested that each
tribe has its own language but not a caste; for example, Gonds speak Gondi language, Bhils speak
Bhili or Vagdi language, Santhals speak Santhali language, and so on. But since there are tribes
which do not have their own languages but speak a dialect of one of the main Indian languages,
as in South India, therefore purely cultural criterion of language also is not a scientific criterion for
distinguishing between a tribe and a caste.
Economic backwardness too is not a correct criterion for distinction between a tribe and a caste. To
maintain that tribals are backward and primitive but caste Hindus are not is not a correct statement.
It is true that many tribes even today are economically backward; they have low income, use
primitive methods in cultivation and in some cases still use barter system in exchange, but there
are many tribes (for example, Meena) which are economically advanced. At the same time, there
are many castes which are as much economically backward as many tribes. Bailey (1960 : 9) also
rejects this criterion by holding that in so far as the phrase ‘economically backward’ refers to a
standard of living rather than to a type of economic relationship, it is sociologically unsatisfactory.
He has suggested that instead of taking the totality of behaviour, we should narrow the enquiry
(in differentiating between a tribe and a caste) by concentrating on particular fields of behaviour
in a given society. He, thus, used politico-economic system or ‘economic structure’, as he calls it,
for differentiating between a tribe and a caste in his study of Konds (tribe) and Oriyas (caste) in
Orissa. In the analysis of the politico-economic organization, he concentrated on two factors : (i)
control over land, and (ii) right to resources of land. He maintained that in both the tribal and
caste societies, we find ‘landowners’ who have direct access to land, and ‘dependents’ who are
dependent on the landowners for achieving their share of land’s resources. But analyzing the
economic organization of a village territory (inhabited by castes) and a clan territory (inhabited by
tribes), he found that a village is divided into economically specialized interdependent castes
arranged hierarchically, whereas though a clan territory is also composed of groups but these are
not hierarchically arranged and nor they are interdependent through economic organization. In
other words, in a tribal society, a larger proportion of people has a direct access to land while in
the case of a caste-based society, the larger population of people achieves the right to land through
a dependent relationship. Thus, according to Bailey (Ibid : 264-65), a tribe is organized on a
‘segmentary system’ and a caste is organized on an ‘organic system’. He writes : “The only
solution (to differentiate between tribe and caste) is to postulate a continuum, at one end of which
is a society whose political system is entirely of the segmentary egalitarian type and which contains
no dependents whatsoever, and at the other end of which is a society in which segmentary
political relations exist only between a very small proportion of the total society, and most people
act in the system in the role of dependents. The political system of this society can be compared
with an organic system.” But he holds that at what point of continuum a tribe ceases and a caste
begins is impossible to say.
In India, the situation is even more complicated because there is hardly any tribe which exists as
a separate society. No tribe in India has a completely separate political boundary. Big tribes like

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 103