Page 26 - DSOC202_SOCIAL_STRATIFICATION_ENGLISH

Unit 2: Basic Concepts Relating to Stratification

Madan remarks that the principle of ranking by which the elements of a whole (society) are Notes
ranked in relation to the whole help us to obtain a holistic view of the system and to overcome the
dualism of opposition. As such, Dumont seems to follow the functionalist approach to social
stratification as propounded by Talcott Parsons and Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore.
Another, a somewhat surprising admirer of Dumont, is Dipankar Gupta. He considers Dumont,
the author of Homo Hierarchicus “as the most advanced and sophisticated proponent of the social
anthropological mainline view of the caste system”. Further, Gupta writes :
Dumont is not only the most systematic exponent of the dominant conceptual view of the caste
system but he attained this distinction by undermining almost all the known conceptual views on
the subject, either in terms of detail - in the case of those whose overall conclusions match his - or,
in terms of conception and methodology in the case of those whose conclusions that could perhaps
be extended to refute his, to wit, those of Senart and Bougie. When he refutes Bougie, Senart or
even Ghurye and Karve, he takes them on, not so much for what they say, but more for what they
imply. As we find ourselves in sympathy with these implications, it is to Dumont that we must
necessarily pay greater attention.
Gupta also advises even critics of Dumont must accept his singular contribution that to this
subject. In our view, the so-called singular contribution of Dumont is conceptualization of
“hierarchy” as a rigid and static system of stratification, opposite to the egalitarian and equalitarian
system of social relations in France and the rest of the western world. Somewhere Dumont is
haunted by the superiority of the western world in general and its intellectual superiority in
particular. His inhospitable comments and observations on the views of some of the Indian scholars
like A.K. Saran, Iravati Karve, A.R. Desai, etc., testify his preconceived inferiority of the Indian
society and its intellectuals. Since T.N. Madan has gone out of his way to admire Dumont’s
understanding of the caste system, it is necessary to see the implications of Dumont’s viewpoint
as emanating from his own perspective of the idea of ‘Homo Acqualis’.
Let us now see what Gupta says after speaking in defence of Dumont’s idea of caste system as “a
true hierarchy”. The questions raised by Gupta in lieu of “Facts Against Theory” (given by Dumont)
are quite eclectical, and refer to disconnected contexts, situations, issues, regions and people. As
such there cannot be a “true hierarchy” of the caste system.
Caste Hierarchy
The idea of caste elaboration or of a scale of rigidity-flexibility of caste ranking, suggested by
McKim Marriott, is quite relevant to know the different regions of India. Gupta seems to agree to
this view. He writes : “A true hierarchy, according to us, is an unambiguous linear ranking on a
single variable. Besides such criteria as wealth in cash, women, cattle, or land, authority can also
be a valid criterion for a true and continuous hierarchy.” Relative positions of status and authority
would change by effecting transformation of a given organization/system. Gupta further writes :
“Continuous hierarchies are built around a single criterion, which is shared to a greater or lesser
extent by all those who occupy that hierarchy.” There are discrete classes that separate units into
exclusive categories, incommensurable and qualitative. A person is, for example, a Brahmin
or a Vaishya or a Rajasthani/Bengali/Punjabi, etc. He cannot be anything else except one in a
given context. “A continuous hierarchy, on the other hand, is made up on the basis of a quantitative
variation of a single attribute across levels or strata.” Thus, there are continuous hierarchies and
discrete classes. This distinction largely corresponds with the classifications proposed by Smaje
and Levi-Strauss.
Dumont has mainly relied on indological sources on India’s caste system. Independent India
shows vast differences, differential interests, conflicts, exploitation, upward and downward
mobilities, and internal and overseas migrations, which, in fact, should become the basis of
understanding of Indian social formation. Dumont has played down the importance of social

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 21