Reading A !

8/3/2019 Reading A !

1/9

Caste in the 21st Century: From System to ElementsAuthor(s): A. M. ShahReviewed work(s):Source: Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 42, No. 44 (Nov. 3 - 9, 2007), pp. 109-116Published by: Economic and Political WeeklyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40276753 .

Accessed: 01/02/2012 12:54

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Economic and Political Weekly is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to

Economic and Political Weekly.
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epwhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40276753?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/40276753?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=epw


2/9

Caste in the 21st Century:FromSystemto ElementsAMSHAHTheargumenthatwhile asteas a systems more rlessdead, ndividualastes areflourishingswidelyaccepted.However,he notion f caste s a system"sderivedmainlyrom tudies f he rural ather han heurban ommunity.n his rticle,ndividual aste s eenin he context fbothrural ndurban ommunitiesndits everal spects,particularlyherule f ndogamy sitsdefiningriterion,reanalysed t some length ndsome mplicationsf heanalysisrepointed ut.

This s a revised nd enlarged ext fmyDiamondJubilee ecture ttheEthnographicnd Folk Culture ociety, ucknow n February4,2007. I thank the members f the society,particularlyts generalsecretaryukantChaudhuri, or nvitation nd hospitality. thankB S Baviskar, C Joshi,G K Karanth, ancyLobo, P J Patel,TulsiPatel and N R Sheth for comments n the draftof this article.

1955,M N Srinivas presented a paper, 'Castes: Can TheyExist in the India of Tomorrow?',at a national seminar on"Casteismand Removal ofUntouchabilty"nDelhi, attended,amongothers,bysuch distinguished ersons s S Radhakrishnan,JagjivanRam, Govind Ballabh Pant,V KRV Rao, Kaka Kalelkarand Irawati Karve. The paper was published in the seminarre-portas well as in the EconomicWeekly1955). After lifetime fscholarshipon caste, in 1999, the last year of his life, Srinivasdelivered a lectureunder differentitles nBangalore,Delhi andKolkata, on the passing away of caste as a system. twas pub-lishedposthumously n2003 in the Economic ndPoliticalWeeklyunderthe title, AnObituaryon Caste as a System'.Srinivasex-panded thistitle ntoa sentence,"While caste as a system sdead,individual castes are flourishing"ibid: 459)- He made this state-mentalmost at the end ofthe 20th century, fterpublicationofhisbook,Caste: ts Twentiethenturyvatar 1996). t is timenow othink f he21st entury.Caste as a SystemLet me firstpresentbriefly rinivas' thoughtson the death ofcaste as a system,usinghis own language.

Thelocalised ystem fproductionffoodgrainsndothernecessi-tiesbased on a caste-wise ivision f abour,whichhas endured orover wothousandyears, s fastbreaking ownall overrural ndia,and s likely odisappear n the nearfuture. roduction illbecomefreed romati division f abour, conomic elations illbecome u-tonomous,ndgrainpayments ill be replaced y ash. ndian uralsocietysmovingrom tatus ocontract. nessentialharacteristicfthe ystem ashierarchy,hich xpressedtselfnthe diom fritualpuritynd impurity.hishierarchys breaking ownunder he m-pactofnew deasofdemocracy,quality,nd ndividualelf-respect.While aste s a systemsdeadordying,ndividualastes rethriving[Srinivas003: 459, mphasisn the riginal].G S Ghurye,one of the founders of sociology in India, hadobserved longback inhis classic workon caste (1932: 26-28) that

thecommunity spect ofcaste and caste patriotismwere increas-ing at the expense ofharmonyofparts - ofcourse, partswhichwere subordinatedto one another. Srinivasmade similarobser-vations in his 1955 paper: "The horizontal solidarityof a castegained at the expense ofthe vertical solidarityofcastes in a re-gion. ... In general, itmaybe confidentlyaid that the last hun-dredyearshave seen a great increase in caste solidarity, nd theconcomitantdecrease of a sense of nterdependencebetween dif-ferent astes living n a region" (p 136). Subsequently, numberof cholarsformulated heirunderstandingofchanges in caste insubstantially the same way, though in differentwords: from

EconomicPoliticaleekly November3, 2007 *^9


3/9

SPECIAL RTICLE - =cooperationocompetition;rom ierarchyodifference,ivi-sion, eparationrrepulsion;rom hole oparts; romystemoelements runits; rom tructureo substance.RuralversusUrbanCasteWhile agreewith hemainthrust ftheaboveformulation,haveonemajor isagreement:he deaof aste s a systemsthatofcaste n therural ommunity,nd ignores aste nthetradi-tional, re-modernrbancommunity.1fter ll, India has hadurban ommunitiesince he ime f he ndusValley ivilisation,centuries eforeChrist. heyhavegrown nnumber nd sizeover he enturies,nd castehas existednthem or s long swehavehadknowledgebout heir ocialsystem. haveargued tsome ength lsewhere1982,1988), nd I P Desai oinedme narguingn ourbook 1988), hat twouldbe false oassume hatthenature f aste ncitieswas the ame as that nvillagesnthepast, ndthereforeurunderstandingf hangesncastewouldbeunreal f twerebasedentirelyn ourunderstandingfruralcaste. nfact, rban astehas acquired ncreasingaliencewiththe teadymarch furbanisationuring he secondhalfofthe20th enturynd tsrapidmarch rojectedy demographersorthe21st entury.lready,racticallyneout of veryhreendi-ans now ives nanurban rea,andthefigures ikelyo be oneout f verywoduringhis entury.omeparts f ndia, uch sGoa,Gujarat,Maharashtra ndTamilNadu,are likely o touchthis igureooner han ther arts.2 longwith his emographicpossibility,e should eep n mind wo ocialfacts. ne, ince hepopulationfmost astes sspread oth nvillages nd ntowns,the ulture f heurban ectionnany aste preads asily o tsruralection. nd, wo, heurban entres ielddisproportionatelygreaternfluencensociety s a whole n comparison ith hesizeof heir opulation.twouldnotbe an exaggerationopredictthat rbanastewill verwhelmural aste uringhe 1st entury.FocusonRuralCasteAnunderstandingf rban aste, othnthepast ndthepresent,is thereforemperativeor comprehensivenderstandingfcaste.Unfortunately,owever, ostociologistsnd ocial nthro-pologists uringhe secondhalfofthe 20thcentury,e, duringthe irsthase fmodernndian ociologynd ocial nthropology,focused heir ttention n rural rather han urbancaste,andtheir eneral ormulationsboutboth structurend change nIndian ociety erebased argelyn observationf ural ociety.One oftenncounteredhe tatement,India sa landofvillages".Many tated hat lthough eople ived ntowns, heir ocial n-stitutionsere uralncharacter.Many onsidered aste as essentially ural, r as having tsoriginn rural ociety,ndthereforeural ven f tprevailedncities.Forexample,Andre Beteillewrote n an essay,"Castemerelyepresents systmatisationndelaborationf deas andvalueswhich represents importantngredientsnmost grariansocieties"1974: 39). In another ssay,he wrote, One cannothelpbeing trucky heremarkablessociation etween asteorcaste-likerganisationsnd theagrarianwayof ife" ibid:60).Hethen uotedwith pproval,MichaelYoung's tatement,Thesoilgrows aste, he machinemakes classes" ibid:64). Apart

from uch tatementsnvolvingheviewthat he ndian illageconsistedfmainly,fnot nly,griculturalastes, heyssumedthat asteswererural noriginwhereverhey xisted. donotbelittle he ignificancefvillage tudies ut would ubmithatIndian ociologyas sufferedrom certainmbalancen accountof ts elativeeglectf ntensivetudies f owns nd cities.Due tothis pproach, he dominant iewofcaste ysteme-mained ural. ormy resenturpose,t s notnecessaryodwellat length n the natureof pre-modernrban caste. I wouldmentionere, nly riefly,owurban astewas ngeneral ifferentfrom ural asteroughlytthebeginningf he19th entury.Thevillagewas a smallcommunityivided nto relativelysmallnumber fcastes;thepopulation feach castewas alsosmall, ometimesnly neor wohouseholds, ith ittle ossibil-ity f he xistence f ub-castes.nter-casteelationsperatedna face-to-faceommunitynd overlappedwithrelations f anumber fdifferentypes; nbrief,heyweremultiplex.n thecity, n the other and, hepopulationwas dividednto largenumber f astes, nd most f hem adeacha large opulation,oftenubdividedptowhat havecalleddivisionsf he econd,third nd evenfourthrder, e, sub-caste,ub-sub-caste,ndsub-sub-sub-caste1982).Sometimes division ould venbe aself-containedndogamousunit.The members f one castewould nteract ithmembers fonly omeof the other astesandthat oowithdifferentegrees f ntensity.lso, hereweremanydifferentpheres f nteraction, ithpartial rminimaloverlap etween hem.Inmost,fnot ll,urban entres,heHindu astes ived longwith ne ormore fnon-Hinduroups,uch s Christian, ain,Jew,Muslim, arsiand Sikh.3Many ncludedEuropeans, hemostcommon mongthembeingtheBritish. hisfact, longwith he fact fmultiplicityf castes nd sub-castesmong heHindus, estrictedhe jajmani'typeof nter-casteelationsoonly few astes ndmade he conomic elationsetweenmostcastes ontractualndmarket-oriented.The relationsf Hindumerchant ith thermerchantsndcraftsmen,othHindu ndnon-Hindu,rovidedmodelnrespectof economic nd socialrelationsn the town.4 ven he ervicecastes ouldbea part f ontractualndmarketelations.etmegiveustoneexample.na small ownnGujarathat knowwell,therewerebothHinduand Muslimbarbers,ndmanyHindusused he ervicesf ither, ayingncashperpieceofwork. heHindus equired Hindu arber'services nly nthecontextfcertain ituals,ndhere lso,he waspaid perpiece fwork.On thewhole, heprinciplefdifference,ivision rsepara-tion ompetedwith heprinciplefhierarchyn urban aste. notherwords, herelations etweencasteswere characterisedmore yuxtapositionhanbyhierarchy,nd more y senseofbeing ifferenthan y senseofbeinghigherr ower. hisdoesnotmean hat heprinciplefhierarchyidnot peratenthe ity,butust heprinciplef eparationmposedimitationsn t.UrbanHeterogeneityWe hould oa step urther.he social nd cultural eterogeneityof the cityprovided congenialgroundfor nnovationndchange, ncludingdeasand movementsgainst astehierarchy.

110 November3, 2007 EconomicPoliticaleekly


4/9

- - SPECIAL RTICLERomila hapar sperhaps ightnattributingheriseofhetero-dox ects uch s BuddhismndJainismnancientndia to thegrowthfurban entres1984: 109,153-54)- largenumber fsocial thinkers ho laterpropagated gainstthehierarchicalfeatures f aste amefrom rban entres.EvenLouisDumont,hemost rdent dvocate fhierarchysthe verarchingrinciplef aste,did notruleout hepossibilityof eparation xistings an independent rinciple. e wrote nhisbook,HomoHierarchicus,It snot laimed hat eparation,reven repulsion', aynotbe presentomewheres an independ-ent actor".e didnotgive mportanceothis ossibilityecause,as hestated,What s sought ere sa universal ormula, rulewithoutxceptions"1972:346,n 55b).At east oneofthese x-ceptions as, think, rban aste.Dumont imself larifiedhatheneglectedrban aste ibid:172). nmy iew, hisneglectwasdue o the ity eing heprimeite or heprinciplefdifference,division,eparation,rrepulsion.Themainpointsthat n emphasis n ndividual astewas al-ready feature fpre-modernrbancasteto a certain xtent.The neweconomic,olitical,ocial and ideological orces f he19th nd 20thcenturies ffected irsthe urbancentres, ndstrengthenedhe mphasisn ndividualaste n hem.Gradually,the rural conomynd society lso came under he mpact fthese orces,nd caste s a systemost ts trength,ivingway oemphasisn ndividual aste.Boundaries of ndividual CasteWith he growing mphasison individual aste, its identityemerged s theprime haracteristicf caste during he 20thcentury. hat hape ttakesduring he21st enturyhouldbeconsidered prime ociological roblem. discuss omeof tsaspects ere.Every aste, n itsquestformaintainingtsunity, acestheproblemfmaintainingtsboundaries. s ong s a casteunit ssmall,with tspopulation pread ver smallnumber fvillagesandtownsnan area, t s able tomaintain tsboundariesmoreor ess uccessfully. arge aste,with tspopulationpread on-tinuouslynvillage fter illage nd intowns ver large rea,oftenntwoormore istrictsn a state, ndsometimes,ven ntwoormore tates, aces normous roblemsnmaintainingtsidentity.womajor evelopmentsuring he 20th enturyavecomplicatedhese roblems:ne, tendencyo break hebound-ariesof ub-castesnd amalgamate hem nto he arger aste;andtwo, ispersal f hepopulationf lmost very asteoverlargerrea due tomigration,otonlywithin ut lso outsiden-dia.Afew astesbecamehuge onglomerates,achwith tspop-ulationpread ver wo or more tateswithinndiaand a sub-stantial opulationnother ountriesftheworld.We now ivein neraofmega astes.Castes ooareglobalised.Four raditional echanismsfmaintainingasteboundariesbecameweak,and moreor less brokedown,during he 20thcentury:1) The prohibitionn exchangeof water and food(called roti yavahar'n northernnd westernndia)betweencastes, ven between he former ntouchablesnd theothers,haspracticallyisappearedn urban reasand sonthewayoutinthe ural reas.Thisdevelopmentspart f hegeneral ecline

inideas ofpurityndpollutionhroughouthe Hindu ociety;5(2) The distinctiveustoms nd institutions the diacriticalmarks of very aste regradually isappearing,nda certaincultural niformitysemergingnsociety.n thepast, ne couldidentify person's asteby ooking this/her ress,isteningohis/herpeech, ndwatching is/her eneral earing.Gone rethose ays, ot nlyntowns, ut lso nmany illages. imilarly,therites fpassage nd other ituals re alsobecomingniform.Theuniformitys emergingecauseofthe ncreasingpread fboth anskritisationnd westernisation.6otakeustoneexam-pleregardinganskritisation,hewedding ituals mong sec-tion fthedalits nGujarat observed ecentlyreas sanskriticas thoseof theupper astes.7 ndtotake ustone example e-gardingwesternisation,venvillage girlshavebegunto wearjeans; (3) Thetraditional,lose, hough ot nvariable,elation-ship etween aste ndoccupation as more r essdisappeared,and almost very aste s nowmulti-occupational;nd (4) Thecastepanchayats custodian f ules ndregulationsf aste, nimportantoundary-maintenanceechanism, as practicallydisappearedot nlyntowns ndcities, ut lso nmost illages.There revery ew astesnow with mechanism ormposingpunitivection gainst iolation f tsrulesby tsmembers. n"thewhole, hedefendersf asteboundaries ave hard ime.EndogamyversusHypergamyIt swidely elieved hat, mong he raditionaloundary-main-tenancemechanismsf ndividualastes, hemost owerfulasbeenthe ule f aste ndogamy.t s thehardest ut ocrack, sis often aid. t s consideredhedefiningharacteristicf aste,because t alone decides hehereditaryature fcastemember-ship. thas alsoacquiredegal anction ince rotectiveiscrimi-nationwasprovidedn thebasisof aste nd triben the ndianConstitutionn 1951.Every asteor tribe ncludednthethreecategories f backward classes (scheduled castes,scheduledtribes,ndOtherBackward lasses) s assumed o havediscreteboundaries ue to theassumption fendogamy. evertheless,the ule f aste ndogamyequires riticalxamination.Althoughhescripturesnjoineduponall Hindus o observetherule f aste ndogamy,hey lsoprovidedoranuloma'hy-pergamous) nd 'pratiloma'hypogamous)marriages,oth ofwhich iolated herule.The Dharmashastrasanctionednulo-mamarriageKane1941:50-66]. In hypergamy,woman falower astemarried manofan upper aste,but tdidnot n-volve manfrom lower astemarryingwoman romnuppercaste. nhypogamy,twas thereverse. lmost very arge asteused to have nternalypergamyelated o ts nternalierarchy.Internal ypergamyreated urplus fmarriageable omen ttheupper ungs nd their hortagetthe ower ungs. he atterusually ed mentomarrywomenfromcceptableower astesandcaste-like roups uch s tribes.ntra-casteypergamyasthusntimatelyinkedwith nter-casteypergamy.Whilehypogamy as rare,hypergamyaswidespread. hehistoricals well as ethnographiciterature entionsnnumer-able castesarising ut ofhypergamousmarriages, ith ppro-priatemyths forigin oncoctedbybardsand byauthors fpuranas o egitimisehem. uchmyth-makers,rahmin s well

EconomicPoliticaleekly November3, 2007 m


5/9

SPECIAL RTICLE _ =as non-brahmin,aveexisted ince ncient imes seeShahandShroff958;Das 1968;Thapar 984;Shah1986].In early thnography,enzil bbetson,uperintendentf the1881Census fPanjab,was perhaps hefirst oreportnhyper-gamy1883: 56).Not nly hat, erbert isley,he ommissionerof he1901Census f ndia,8n hismonumental ork, he eopleof ndia, even credited bbetsonwith "inventing"he term(1915: 63, n).9 isley rovided general ccount f he ustom,puttingogethervidence rom ifferentarts f ndia ibid:163-71, 78-81,84-85).Hethought,[the ustom] obe ofgreat nti-quity,nd toprevailn ndiaover widearea atthepresent ay"(ibid:165).The ater ensus nd other thnographiceportsur-ing he olonial imes rerepletewith eferencesohypergamy.J H Hutton,hecommissionerfthe1931Censusof ndia,10helastcaste-basedensuswith ublished esults,tatedn hiswellknown ook oncaste, [Hypergamy]s a widespread eaturefthe aste ystem"1946:53).McKimMarriott,n a recent aperonvarna and ati (2004:358)basedonanextensivetudy fhistorical aterials ince heancient imes s well as modern thnographiciterature,tates,"Since henineteethentury,atishavebeenwidely utmistak-enly quatedwith heoreticalcastes" entitiesmagined romfragmentary,ostly riestly,nformationo be uniform,trictlyhereditarysolates The rigid aste ystem'madeupof collec-tion f uch ntitiess not ikelyver o haveexisted "If violation fcasteendogamywas thuswidespreadn pre-modernndia, henwhys caste ndogamyonsidereds thede-finingriterionf aste n modernndia? tseems o methat heBritishureaucracynd udiciary,ooking or ertaintyn Hinducustomntheir ffortsocodify ustomaryaw,played n impor-tant,fnot hedecisive,ole ndefiningaste s a strictlyndoga-mousgroup. heywerehelped ncoming othis onclusion ythe rthodoxanditsndshastris hom hey onsultedor xpertopinion. his onclusion as more r ess cceptedn cholarshiponcaste. t also led tovigorousttemptso show astes s racialgroups, upportedy nthropomtrieeasurements.his nter-prisefailed, hough he dea continueso raise tshead amongvested nterestsround heworld romime o time.All nall,thefaith nendogamys thedefiningharacteristicf castewas sostronghatt ed orelativeeglectf ntensivetudyfhypergamyinmodernociologynd social nthropology.e haveonly fewgood tudies, utnot ufficientogive wider nddeeper iew.StudyofHierarchyAnother actor ontributingo thisneglectwas the dominantconcern or tudying ierarchyrvertical nity fcastes, ndlesserconcern or tudyinghehorizontal nity f individualcastes.The castehierarchyas studied sually na villageorafewneighbouringillages.Thestudy fhorizontalnity,ntheotherhand,required bservationf thepopulation fa castespread ver large rea.Only uchobservationanhelp bservehypergamydequately.etmenarrateriefly y ieldxperiencenthis espect.When first ent omy ield illage n KhedadistrictinGujaratn1955,wentwith he ssumptionf aste ndogamy.And ndeed very aste n thevillage ppeareddiscrete. or x-ample, he dominant aste ofrajputs lwaysclaimed hat heir

marriageswereconfinedo their aste.Therewas no wayofcheckinghisn he illage, ecausenorajputmarriageook lacenthevillage r even n theneighbouringillages.However,nceaccompanied rajput room's artyCjan' nGujarati,barat' nHindi)going o the bride's illage ocatedfar way n anotherdistrict.discoveredhat hebride elonged o the ower aste fkoli. his xperienceutme on the rail f numberf theruchmarriages, hichhelpedme understand he hypergamye-tweenkolis ndrajputs,nd thekolis' laim obeing ajputsndkshatriyas.ater observed,nd read iteraturen,hypergamyamong ther astes nd tribesnGujarat swell as intheneigh-bouring egionsShah1982;Shahand Desai 1988;Shah2002]."Inpre-modernndia,mostHindus, f ourse, ractisedndog-amy, ut herewasalsohypergamouselationshipetweenmanylower ndupper astes s anaccepted orm. ypergamyas farmoreprevalenthanwe mightiketo believe.12he mostwellknown ase isthat fhypergamouselation etweenherajputsorkshatriyas,n theonehand andmany easant astes, s alsotribes,n theother,ll overwestern,entral, orthernndeast-ern ndia.Otherwellknown asesare those f elationsetweenmarathas nd kunbis n MaharashtraOrenstein963;Carter1974;Deshpande 004],between atidarsndkunbisnGujarat[Pocock 954, 957, 972 nd Shah1982, 002],and theuniquecase ofhypergamyetween hematrilineal airs nd thepatri-linealnamboodirirahminsn Kerala.

Hypergamyrovides ropetoa lower astetohelp trise nsocial tatus,o claim quality ith higheraste, ndeventuallytoadopt tsname.Usually, heupper asteopposes his laim.There satplayhere complex rocess f nclusionnd exclusion- the ower astetryingoget ncluded nthehigher ne,andthe atter ryingoexclude t for pioneeringnalysis fthisprocess, ee Pocock1954).Hypergamyhus mpliesoose andfluid asteboundaries. ignificantly,hisboundaryffects otonly herelationshipetween hehypergamouslyarried us-band andwifebut lso their hildrenndother elatives,atri-lateral,matrilateralndaffinal.Manyof thenumerous ases of ower astesclaiming obehighernesreportedn thereportsf heCensus f ndiafor ar-iousBritishdministeredrovincesndprincelytates rom871to1931 roseoutofhypergamy.heseclaimsweremade nordertoseek egitimacyromhegovernmentor igheritual nd so-cial status.The censusofficials eclared heir erdict nwhattheyconsideredwas the actual status.After eservationsorbackward lasses becameoperationaln independentndia,alower aste nhypergamouselationwith higherasteusuallyclaims obe includedn thebackward lasscategory ith viewtoget dvantages f reservation. owever,t continuesoprac-tisehypergamy,nd claims imultaneouslyobe a higherastefor itualnd socialpurposes. uch caste sthus oth forward"and "backward".his sa contradiction,ut ndian ocietyeemsto have hosen o ivewith t.Hypergamy mong TribesLike ower astes,many ribal roups ll over he ountry,xceptperhapshenorth-east,avehypergamouselationshipithertaincastes n their icinity.We have known hroughhepioneering

112 November3, 2007 EconomicPolitical eekly


6/9

- SPECIAL RTICLEwork f urajit inha 1962, 965)how numberf ribesncen-tral ndiahaveusedhypergamyoclaim oberajputsndkshatri-yas seealso Dube1977: assim]. imilarly,eliege's ook howshow hebhils, large ndwidely pread riben westernndia,practised ypergamyith herajputs1985:8, 42, 96-97,118,152, 56).Many amiliesnthese ribeswererich ndpowerful,usually ribal hieftainslaimingo be rajas, ndtheywere bletoget heirwomenmarriednto stablished,houghower ta-tus,rajput amilies,ndthen laimrajput ndkshatriyatatus.Hypergamynables ribal roups o claim qual statuswith hecastes eceivingheir omen swives, husmakingheboundarybetweenribe nd casteblurred. any ribal roupseem ohavebecome astes y his rocessnhistory.It s wellknown hat emalenfanticiderevailedna numberof astes uringhe19thenturynd continuederhaps or fewdecadesduringhe20th entury. isley aw itsrelation ithhy-pergamy1915: 73-78),nd recent esearches ave confirmedt[Vishwanath000].The two ogetherreated,smentionedar-lier, hortagefmarriageable omen tthe ower ungs f nter-nalhierarchyf caste,whichnturn ed tomarriagesf tsmenwithwomennother, suallyower, astes ndtribes.nrecenttimes,he ncreasingncidence f emale oeticideas resultedna similarituation,erhaps na larger cale, n several arts fIndia. t sreported,or xample, hatmanymen nHaryana ndPunjab rebringing omen ormarriageroms far-offs Bihar,Jharkhand, rissa,WestBengaland Tamil Nadu.We do notknow heconsequences f suchhypergamyor heconcernedcastes tboth nds.If onegets emptedothink hat he ruleof casteendogamywasbeing iolated nly t the ower ndsof castehierarchy,twould ea mistake.tcouldbeviolated ven t thehighestevel.Tounderstandhis,we shouldkeep nview thefact hat veryrajaormaharaja elonged oa caste jati) in a regionnd stoodatthe pexof ts nternal ierarchy.fwetake nto onsiderationall the Hinduroyalfamilies romNepal to KanyakumarindfromManipuroSaurashtra,hey elonged oa largenumberfdifferentatis.Eventhe claimthat ll ofthembelonged othesamevarna,namely, shatriya, as not lways ustained; herewere ubtle rguments gainst t. Ifmarriage lliances ofthemembers f theseroyalfamilies re examinedclosely,13heywould howhowtheruleof asteendogamy asviolated t thehighestevel fHindu ociety. ypergamyperatedn his ontextalso,with herajput oyalfamilies fRajasthan ccupyinghehighest ositionndreceivingrides rom oyal amiliesn therest f ndiabutnotgiving rides o themn return.Modern nter-CasteMarriageIn addition o the raditionalypergamousnter-caste arriagesdiscussedbove, herere nter-castearriagesaking laceunderthe nfluence f westernisationnd modernisation.hatsuchmarriagesreincreasing apidlynurban reas iswellknown,but heyre also increasinglowlyn rural reas.Oppositionothem asweakened osuch n extenthat hedefendersf asteboundariesrefindingt xtremelyifficult,fnot mpossible,opunish uchnewlywed spousesbythrowinghem ut oftheirrespectiveastes. smentionedarlier,ardly ny astepanchayat

is now eft n urban reas,and the few eft n rural reas arehardlybletotake uchpunitivection.nany ase, uchpunish-mentsno onger realthreat.Modernawdoesnot llow t.DissolvingCasteSince nter-caste arriages avebeentaking laceformore hana century,here s nownot nly second ndthird ut ven ourthgenerationopulationhat oes nothave ny aste.Aftern nter-castemarriagenonegeneration,suallyhemarriagesf hildrenof uch couplewouldbemarriagesetween aste-lessndividu-als. Theargumenthat child orn utof n nter-castearriageinheritshefather'saste,willno ongerworknviewof ncreas-inggenderquality. hechildmaynot ike o nherithemother'scaste ither./hemighthoosenot ohave ny aste t all.Inter-caste arriages ppearto be an inevitable hange nview ofchanges aking lace ina number f pheres fcultureandsociety,hemostmportanteing herising geatmarriage,the deology ffreedomf choice nmarriage,he ncreasingfreedomngender elationsn educationalnstitutions,n theworkplace,ntheperformingrts, nd n entertainmentctivities,and thepowerfuloleofboth heprintnd the lectronic ediain preadinghe dea offreedom f hoice nmarriage.To understandnter-caste arriage dequately,we have totake nto ccount he structuralistance etween he castesofthe pouses. have hown Shah1982; hah nd Desai1988]howa caste jati) of hefirstrdersdivided ftennto ivisionsfupto the hird rder,n otherwords,nto ub-sub-sub-castes.henthemovementor nter-caste arriage egan n thebeginningfthe20th entury,fnot arlier,nter-caste arriagesookplacebetweendivisions fthe owest rder, e, thethird rder. heconnubial ieldhenwidened raduallyuringhe entury.ow-adays,marriagesretaking lacebetween hemajor astes, e,divisions f hefirstrder, or xample, etween rahminsndbanias orbetween ayasthasnd ats. naddition,marriagesretaking lace,particularlyn largecities, etween astesofoneregionndanother,or xample, etween Punjabi nda TamilHindu, rbetween Gujaratind a BengaliHindu. here re lsomarriages etween ribes nd castes,which revirtuallyikeinter-caste arriages. inally,dd toall thesemarriagesmongtheHindus hemarriagesetweenHindus nd membersfotherreligions.he dvocates f aste-basedensuswillhave oprovidein he uestionnaire,box, NoCaste", or espondentsotickndI am ure heywillfindhe otalnumberf aste-lesseople n hecountryuite ubstantial.The caste deologues ll over hecountryrealarmed ythechangingmarriagecenario. hey redevising varietyf trat-agems ocounterhetrend,mainly hroughasteassociations.Asmentionedarlier, unitivemeasures remore r ess ruledout.Therefore,he leaders n every astefocuson creatingnumber fopportunitiesor oung oys ndgirls f he aste omeet ndengage n uch ctivitiesswouldfacilitateheir now-ing achotherntimatelyndthey anthen ecide omarry.heelders ell heyouth,Youhavethe freedomomarry ccordingtoyour hoice, ut onfine our hoice oyour aste". oput t npopular anguage, t s "lovemarriage"within hecaste. Of llthe tratagems,tructurallyhemost ignificantsthe tratagem

Economie Politicalweekly November 3, 2007 113


7/9

SPECIALARTICLEeeef= =r ==.-_ _=^ _ ^==nzi= =-.towiden he ield or hoice y rganisingctivities or he argercaste, ecause t lso haspoliticalmplications.t s not urprisingthat oliticiansftenttend hese atherings.owever,t ppearsatpresenthat hedefendersf casteboundaries reunlikelyosucceednhaltinghemarch f nter-caste arriages,hichsba-sicallyhemarchf he ndividual'sreedomf hoicenmarriage.Social nalysts illhave o follow hismarch arefullyuringhe2 st entury.Caste and RelativesDue tocaste ndogamy,veryndividual'setworkf elativesykinshipndmarriage as confinedohis/heraste.Thisnetworkincluded:a) patrilinealin, escended romcommonncestoryseveral, suallyeven, enerations14nd b) a numberf elativesonthe ideofmother,ister, ife, ather's other,ather'sister,mother's other, other'sister, ife's ather, otherndbrother,and o on.Sometimes,n individual asrelatedwith nothern-dividual y woormore f uchrelationships.hat uch verlap-ping elationshipsrevailedn outhndia,mainly ue to close-kinmarriage,s wellknown. heyprevailedn northndia, oo,butunfortunatelye do nothave dequate esearch n them.Thenetworkf elativesccupied he ocial pacebetween heindividual ndhis/heraste, nd mediated etween hem.Anycaste ouldbevisualised s composed f series f nterlockingnetworks frelatives. he number fsuchnetworks ould besmall na small aste, omuch o that n entire aste couldbeone argenetwork.have known ndogamous nits nGujaratcomposedfust woor hree undred ouseholdsach, o muchso that lmost ll ofthem an be placedon one genealogicalchart. ntheother and, arge astes ikekoli,maratha,kkali-ga, at oryadavhad a widely pread eriesofnetworksf rela-tives. or n individualn a large aste, henetwork frelativeswas themost mmediate epresentationfhis/heraste.Somenetworksouldbe so tightlynit hat heywould ook ike ub-castes.A large,widely pread, aste was in fact congeries fcastes atherhan single ohesive asteentity.he networksfrelativeshusworked s thefoundationf caste.Evenwhen astepanchayats ere active nd powerful,heyhad tooperate hrough etworksfrelatives. hemain reasonwas thatmost fthepanchayatmembers sed tobe leaders fthesenetworks. hile small caste wouldhaveonly nepan-chayat, large ne had a series fpanchayats, ith ossibilityfcooperations well s conflictetween hem.Thesenetworksre nowshrinkingnurban entres,oth nsizeas well as in ntensityfrelationship.arge ineagegroupswith eep genealogiesre difficultofind noneplace,becauseofmigrationsfmembersn manydifferent irections othwithinnd outside ndia.Even ointfamilieswithgenealogicaldepthof three or fourgenerations ave been losing spatialcohesion. he same is true ofrelationships y marriage.Anindividualnteracts ithust a fewclose relatives ecauseanincreasingumber fmarriagesre now aking laceoutside heerstwhileasteunit, nd evenwithin uch caste hey end obewithpreviouslynrelatedmembers. ll in all, thenetworksfrelativesregradually eakenings thefoundationor nity findividualaste.

Caste ssociations ave mergeds an mportantew nstitutionsupportingndividual astes inceat least thebeginningfthe20th entury.nitially,heywere mallunits etup n arge itiestopromote elfare f hemembersf he aste n he ity. radu-ally hey iversifiedheirwelfare ctivitiess well s spread heirmembershipo nclude mall owns ndvillages. here re nowcaste, ub-castend even ub-sub-castessociationsn veryityand at the ocal,regional, ational nd even nternationalevels.Usually hey avewrittenonstitutions,ithmembershipees,rules, egulations,ffices,lections nd so on.Many reregis-teredunder he SocietiesRegistrationct orthePublicTrustsAct, nd someclaimto be ngos. While few ssociations ithmanifestoliticalims ame nto xistenceuite arlyn he 0thcentury, ost f uch ssociations ere ormedfterndependencewith view orepresenthecaste nelectoral oliticsnd toad-vance ts laims or enefitsfreservation.Caste AssociationsAlthoughcaste ssociationmightlaim orepresenthe aste sa whole,membershipfno caste ssociation,s far s I know,scoterminousithmembershipf he ntire aste.The main ea-son s that verymemberf hecaste s not lwaysnterestednbecoming member f theassociation, nd eventhough/hemight e a member,/hemight otparticipatectivelyn ts c-tivities.ome ssociationsreonly aucuses,with alse laims frepresentinghe ntire aste.Every aste s nternallyifferenti-ated nwealth, restigendpower,ndtherefore,ocaste sso-ciation epresentshe nterestsf he ntire aste.Everyastehas nternal olitics,ftenwith ival ssociations.There can be conflict ven on vital issues.Let me illustrate.I P Desai,as a member f heSecondSocially ndEducationallyBackward lass CommissionfGujarat popularlynown s theRaneCommission),adreceived etitionsrom largenumberof aste ssociations. egavemea hugepileof hem or erusal.I foundhat, rom number f astes,more han ne ssociationneachhadsubmittedetitions,nedemandingtatusnd the theropposingt. Desai himself eportedwo such cases inourbook(1988: 7,122). etushope omemembersf henumerousaste/tribe ommissions ill tellus - providedhey re notboundbyoathof ecrecy howtheywent boutdecidinghe nclusionrexclusionf astes/tribesntherelevantchedule. his nforma-tionwill hrow lotof ight nthenature f ndividualastes.Onemaybe temptedo think hat he modern aste ssocia-tion s onlyanotherform f the traditional astepanchayat.This is farfrom eality. he fundamental ifferences that,while thepanchayat ad disciplinaryuthority,he associationdoes nothave it. Ofcourse, he associations avetakenuponthemselveshe role offacilitatingndogamousmarriage,ndthusmaintainasteboundaries,uthowfar heywill ucceed nthis olehas to be watched.Some Implicationsof theAnalysisThe aboveanalysis houldhave ndicated hat veryndividualcaste has had complex nternal tructurend organisation.Therewas considerableconomic, ocialandpolitical ifferen-tiation nevery aste. Nocaste shouldbe viewed s a monolith,

II4 November 3, 2007 Economic& Politicalweekly


8/9

with ts members avinghad egalitarian elationshipsn thepast.Except few astesofhighlykilled raftsmennd scribesresidingn thecity, hepopulation fevery astewas dividedinto ural nd urban ections. he caste eadersusually ived nthe own,ndthe ural-urbannequalityxpressedtselfnrural-urbanhypergamy.very easantcaste,for xample,had largelandlords,oldingandunder eudal enures,sually esidingnthe own, ndplaying art nregional olitics. verymerchantcastehadbigbusinessmennd financiersesidingnthetownand petty hopkeepersn villages. Even the ex-untouchablecastesweredifferentiated.f mayuse the anguageofcurrentdiscourseon protective iscrimination, "creamy ayer"ofsome ort r other xistednevery aste, nd isbyno meansmodernphenomenon. he internaldifferentiationn everycaste has increased uring he20thcenturynd is likely o n-crease furtheruring he 21st entury.herefore,he dentityof caste houldnotbe assumed o be an unambiguouseality;ithas tobe cultivatedontinuouslyya variety fmeans.Thisis truemuchmorenowwhen ll caste dentitiesre threatenedbymodernocial, ultural nd deological orces.

Thatcastesplay n importantole npoliticss wellknown.However, e do nothave, s yet, venan outline f heprecisenature frelation etween he nternal tructurendorganisa-tionof ndividualasteand itsrole n widerpolitics. hemainreason sa general ailure ograsp henature f ndividual aste.It sreified,nd een s amonolith,gnoringts nternaltructureandorganisation.etus take, s an illustration,he studies felectoral olitics,where caste figureso prominently.n thewhole,we are ed to believe hat asteplays dominant,friotdecisive, ole n this arena.That this s a facile ssessment sshownna recent ollection fessaysbased on field tudies felectionsnsmall ommunities,othrural ndurban,ndiffer-entparts f ndia [Shah 2007]. Gupta 2000: 148-76)has alsoshown ow heres no correlationetween he aste ompositionof otersn constituencynd the lection esults. he main ea-son sthat veryaste shighly ifferentiated,uch hat tsmem-bers ven n village o not lways ote n bloc.Actually,aste sonly ne of hemany actorsnfluencingoting ehaviour. hepolitical arties nd candidates lways ry o mobilise oters ncaste asis,but heir uccessdepends great ealon thematrixof arious actorsn a locality.The rena nwhich asteplays hemost rucial olitical ole sthat f eservationsor hebackward lasses.Here lso, here resignificantifferencesetweentsrole nthe hree ategoriesfbackward lasses, e, scheduled astes, cheduled ribes, ndother ackward lasses thatscastes).All he ame, he chedulefor ach categoryncludes ndividual astes and tribes, heboundariesf achofwhich reassumed obediscrete. ince hestatutoryenefitsave obe given nly o thebonafidemembersof caste r ribenthe chedule,ts oundaries avetobe clear-lydefined. fterll,when n individual ants o getbenefitsfreservation,/hehas toproduce certificatefbeing memberof he aste r ribe ncludedn the chedule.Since heCensus f ndia has beenconductinghe censusofscheduledastes ndscheduled ribes very 0years ince1951,it sgenerallyssumed hat ll is wellwith hedataabout hem.

However,owfar heCensus f ndiatakes areof he hangingground ealities egardinghe boundaries fevery asteandtribe ncludednthe schedule houldbe examined.Asregardstheother ackward lasses, heres no reliable ata about hemsince 931. uringhe ast hree uartersf century,he ound-ariesofalmost very ne ofthemhavechanged nd becomequitefuzzy. ven thenames ofmanyof themhavechanged.Therefore,hedataabouttheir opulation,ducation,mploy-ment,ncome,ndso on,are bound obe dubious.t snowon-der we readcontradictoryroportionsnd percentagesboutthem n thenewspapers,nd the aw courts emand ccuratedatafrom hegovernment.Census CollectionSincetheboundaries fmany astes re looseandfluid,t thepresentime twouldbe impossibleor heCensus f ndia, heNational ample urvey rganisation,ranyothernvestigatingagency o collect eliablenformationbout oundariesf astesand tribes, nd then, bout theirpopulation. hese agencieswouldface everal omplicatedroblemsntheirnvestigations.Should heir ield nvestigatort thegroundevelrecord nlywhat herespondentays, r should /he nvestigatehe ruthstatusn thecontextf ocietal elationshipsr nthe ontextfgettinghe benefitsfreservation?ow does s/he nsure hattherespondentoesnot answerunderpressure romhe ocalpoliticians?sthe nvestigatorroperlyrainedobe abletocap-ture he ocialrealityntheground?f /hefails oget he or-rect nformation,houldhis/her oss n the tate apital ecidethewaythe censusofficialsuring hecolonial imes ecided?Howwill hebossdecide?Doess/hehave he equisitexpertise?In thecase of castewhosepopulationsspread ver ast reas- notonly vermany istrictsna state, utoftenlsoover woormore tates howwill s/hereconcile hevariedresponses?Are there ompetentnthropologistsnd sociologistsn suffi-cientnumbern theAnthropologicalurvey f ndia,or n theoffice ftheRegistrar eneral ndCensusCommissionerf n-dia,or nanyother overnmentgency,ogive eliable pinion?Finally,basicquestion: oestheConstitutionmpowerhe tateto force citizenodeclare hename fher/hisreal" aste f /hechooses ot odeclaret?

During 871-1931,heCensus f ndiawas not lways uccess-ful n identifyingasteand tribe oundaries.Now, n thefirstdecadeof he 1st entury,hen hese oundaries even hose fscheduled astes nd scheduled ribes areknown o be fuzzy,should he tate akeupon tselfheobof dentifyinghem, obit nanycase cannotperformuccessfully?t s also likelyhatthe ffortsofix aste nd tribe oundariesmighteadtoviolentconflicts.n thissituation,houldthegovernmentecome nagency o imposerigidityn caste and tribeboundaries,ndshould heudiciaryndorsetby onsideringastes nd tribessdiscretenits? hat s,should he tate ake retrogradetep o-wards aste-and-tribeound ociety?fnot, hen hould he tateindulgenprovidingeservationsasedoncaste nd tribe?It srarely ealised hat osupportaste-based eservationssalso tosupport asteendogamy;n otherwords, o supportherestrictionnfreedomf hoice nmarriage.nthis ontext,t s

Economic Politicalweekly November 3, 2007 1]L5


9/9

SPECIAL RTICLE =noteworthyhatmany f thepoliticianshampioninghe causeof aste-basedeservationsre themselvesiolatorsf herule fcaste ndogamys well s ofmany ther ustoms f heir aste. fthey ave themselves otmarried utside heir aste, heir hil-dren nd grandchildrenouldhave.The main reason s thatonce politicianlimbs igh yusing he caste adder,/he ndher/hisamily ove o a city,may e toa mega ityuch s DelhiorMumbai,ndthen ecome art f tsmetropolitanulture itsnumerous on-casteocial networksndinstitutions.ne of hedominanteaturesfthis ultures individual reedom,nclud-ingfreedomrom hebondsofcaste,which ontradictsheem-phasis n casteboundariesmpliedncaste-based eservations.The upportersf aste-based eservationsncludemany aste-less ntellectuals.ven hough heywouldannounce oudly hatthey o not elievencaste nd wouldhave ctually rokenasteboundaries n marriage nd otherwise n personal ife,theyneverthelessupport aste-based eservations.heythink hatreservationsre"progressive"ndwould eadtoempowermentof hebackwardlasses,which n turnwould eadtoa caste-lesssociety.neffect, owever,hese ntellectualsecome ndirect,fnotdirect,upportersfcasteendogamynd thus pponentsffreedom f hoice nmarriage. his s a contradiction,ut ndiaseems o have hosen o ivewith t.Ihope havegiven ome dea ofhowthedynamicsf ndividu-al caste s likely obe the dominant eature f casteduringhe21stentury.herefore,he tudyf his ynamicshould ecomeprimeoncernf ociologicalnd social nthropologicalesearchinthe oming ecades.This doesnotmeanthatwe abandon hestudy fhierarchy,utwe haveto identifytschanging ature,andplace ndividual astes n thechanging ocial and culturalenvironment.llthiswillrequire s to devisenewstrategiesfresearch, articularlynurban reas.The method f ntensivefieldworkill havetooccupy n importantlace n these trate-gies s ever, ut twillhave o be usedwith nnovations.Email: [email protected] Formytherisagreementsithhis ormulation,eemy ook2002) n villagenGujaratn he arly9thentury.2 Accordingo he 001Census,heurban opulationf ndia ormed7.8per ent,andaccordingo theprojections adeby n expert ommitteeppointedy hecensusrganisationtwill e33.5 er entn2026. n2001, he rban ercentageorGoawas49.8,Gujarat 7.4,Maharashtra2.4, ndTamilNadu 4.0 [seeRegistrarGeneralndCensus ommissioner006].3 TheJews ad pread ot nly llalong hewest oast ut lso n the nteriorsfarnorthsat eastAhmedabadndBaroda. wo mall ld ynagoguesave urvivedntheseities.4 SeealsoMattison ines' aper1982) n caste f rtisan-merchantsnTamilNadufor similarrgumentnmodels f ural ersus rban aste.S Ihave evelopedhis ointnmy orthcomingaper,Purity,mpurity,ntouchabil-ity: henndNow'.6 For n elaborationf his oint,eeSrinivas1966) nd hah 2005, 006).7 The emand or alit riestserforminganskriticitualss ohigh hat heGujaratgovernment'separtmentf cheduledastewelfare as beenorganising,ince2000-01, course o rainhemnKarmakandperformancef itualsccordingoscriptures).8 Risleyccupiedeveral thermportantositions,ncludinghedirectorshipf heEthnologicalurveyf ndia.The eople f ndiawaspublishedriginallyn1908,and ts econd ditiondited yWCrooken1915.9 Ibbetson imself, owever,cknowledgedhathe was indebtedoColdstream,one ofhisofficers,or heword hypergamy".e explained,Hypergamyndeedwould ppearrather o mean too muchmarriage' han marriagen a higherrank'; ut hehighestlassical uthorityn ndiapreferst .." 1983:p356,fn ).This uthorityaspossiblyneminentcholar f heDharmasastras ritingnanulomamarriage.io Huttonater ecame rofessorf ocial nthropologyt heUniversityfCambridge.

11 I have ited s muchthnographicvidences could ollectn upportf his bser-vationnShah ndDesai1982: p11-18,7-38 8-16.12 It eemsnter-casteypergamyrevailedoa lesser xtentn outhndia, ossiblybecause f losekinmarriagehere.his s problemfnquiry.13 For discussionf uchmarriages,ee Plunkett1973) nd hah 1982).14 I am gnoringhematrilinealystemere.REFERENCES __^__Beteille, ndre1974): tudiesnAgrarianocialStructure,xford niversityress,Delhi.Carter,nthony1975):CasteBoundaries'nd he rinciplefKinshipmity:MarathaCaste urana',ontributionso ndianociology,(1), p123-37.Das,Veena 1968):A ociologicalpproachotheCaste uranas fGujarat',ociologicalBulletin,7, p 41-64.Deliege, obert1985): he hils fWesternndia: ome mpiricalndTheoreticalssuesinAnthropologyn ndia,National,elhi.Deshpande, rachi2004): Caste s Maratha: ocialCategories,olonial olicy,ndIdentitynEarly wentiethentury',ndian conomicndSocialHistoryeview,41(1), p7-32.Dube, C (ed) (1977): ribal eritagef ndia,Vol1,Ethnicity,dentitynd nteraction,Vikas, elhi.Dumont, ouis 1972):HomoHierarchicus:aste ystemna its mplications,aiacun,London.Ghurye, S (1932):Caste ndRace n ndia,KeganPaul, Trench, rubnerndCo,London.Gupta, ipankar2000): nterrogatingaste, enguin,elhi.Hutton,H 1946): asten ndia,econddition,xfordniversityress, ombay.Ibbetson,enzil harles elf1883):Reportf he ensusf he unjab, 981, ol ,Super-intendentfGovernmentrinting,alcutta.Kane, V (1941): istoryfDharmasastra,ol ,Part ,Bhandarkarriental esearch

Institute,oona.Lobo, ancy1995):TheThakorsfNorth ujarat: aste nthevillagenamenegion,Hindustan,elhi.Marriott, cKim2004): Varna ndJati'nSushilMittalnd Gene hursbyeds), heHinduWorld,outledge,ew orkndLondon,p357-82.Mines,Mattison1982):Models fCaste nd he eft-handivisionnSouthndia', heAmericanthnologist,p467-84.Orenstein,enry1963): Caste ndtheConceptMahratta'nMaharashtra,asternAnthropologist,ol vi, p1-9.Plunkett,rances aft 1973):RoyalMarriagesnRajasthan', ontributionso ndianSociology,,pp64-80.Pocock, avid (1954):TheHypergamyf hePatidars*nK MKapadia ed), rofessorGhuryeelicitationolume,opularrakashan,ombay.- G 57): Inclusionnd Exclusion: Processn theCaste ystemfGujarat',outhWesternournalfAnthropology,3, p19-31.- (1972): anbi ndPatidar: Studyf he atidar ommunityfGujarat, larendonPress, xford.RegistrareneralndCensus ommissioner2006):Populationrojectionsorndia ndStates 001-26, eportf he echnical roupnPopulationrojectionsonstitutedby heNational ommissionnPopulation,ewDelhi.Risley, erbert1915): he eople f ndia, econd dition,dited yWCrooke,eprintused, riental ooks eprintorporation,elhi, 969.Shah,A M 1982):DivisionndHierarchy:nOverview1CastemGujarat',ontrwu-dons o ndianociology,6, p1-33.- (1986):TowardsSociologicalnderstandingfAncientndia', ontributionsondianSociology,0,pp118-33.- (1988):TheRural-Urbanetworksn ndia', outh sia:Journalf he outn sianStudies ssociationfAustralia,1(2), p1-27.- (2002): xploringndia's ural ast:AGujarat illagen he arly ineteenthentury,Oxfordniversityress, elhi.- (2005):Sanskritisationevisited',ociologicalulletin,4(2), p1-12.- (2006): Some urtherhoughtsn Sanskritisation:esponseoNirmalinghRe-joinder',ociologicalulletin,5(1), p112-17.- (ed) (2007):TheGrassrootsfDemocracy:ield tudies f ndian lectwns,erma-nefitlack, elhi.Shah,A M and P Desai 1988): ivisionndHierarchy:nOverviewfCastenGujarat,Hindustan,elhi.Shah,A M and RGShroff1958):TheVahivanchaarots fGujarat: Caste fGene-alogistsndMythographers',ournalfAmericanolklore,1, p246-76, eprintedin Milton ingered),Traditionalndia: tructurendChange,mericanolkloreSociety,hiladelphia,959.Singhji, irbhadra1994):The ajputs f aurashtra,opular rakashan,ombay.Sinha, urajit1962):State ormationndRajputMythnTribal entralndia',Man nIndia, 2(1), p35-80.- (1965)Tribe-CastendTribe-PeasantontinuanCentralndia', an n ndia, 5(0,PP57-83.Srinivas, N 1955):Castes: anThey xistn he ndia f omorrow'?conomic eekly,October5, p1230-32, lso n:Reportf he eminarn CasteismndRemovalfUntouchabilitf,ndian onferencef ocialWork,elhi.1- (1966): ocialChangenModernndia, niversityfCaliforniaress, erkeley.- (2003): AnObituaryn Caste s a System',conomicndPoliticalWeekly,8C5/1February, p455-59-- (ed) 1996):Caste:ts 0th enturyvatar,enguin,elhi.Thapar, omila1984): rom ineageoState: ocial ormationsn theMid-firstillen-nium CintheGangaValley,xfordniversityress, ombay.Vishwanath,S (2000):Femalenfanticidend ocial tructure:ocio-histoncaltudynWesternndNorthernndia, industan,elhi.

HO November3, 2007 EconomicPoliticaleekly

Documents

Reading A !