Page semi-protected

Caste system in India

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about Socio-political stratification in Indian society. For religious stratification in Hinduism, see Varna (Hinduism).
Gandhi visiting Madras (now Chennai) in 1933 on an India-wide tour for Harijan causes. His speeches during such tours and writings discussed the discriminated-against castes of India.

The caste system in India is a system of social stratification[1][page needed] which has pre-modern origins, was transformed by the British Raj,[2][3][4][5] and is today the basis of reservation in India. It consists of two different concepts, varna and jāti, which may be regarded as different levels of analysis of this system.[6]

Varna may be translated as "class," and refers to the four social classes which existed in the Vedic society, namely Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Shudras.[6] Certain groups, now known as Dalits, were historically excluded from the varna system altogether, and are still ostracised as untouchables.[7][page needed][8]

Jāti may be translated as caste, and refers to birth; that is, the caste into which one is born. The names of jātis are usually derived from occupations, and considered to be hereditary and endogamous, but this may not always have been the case. The jātis developed in post-Vedic times, possibly from crystallisation of guilds during its feudal era.[9] The jātis are often thought of as belonging to one of the four varnas.[10]

Although the varnas and jatis have pre-modern origins, the caste system as it exists today is the result of developments during the post-Mughal period and the British colonial regime. After the Mughal period kings, who associated their rule with priests and ascetics, became the epicentre for a caste ideal which focused on martial and regal forms.[11] The British Raj furthered this development, making rigid caste organisation a central mechanism of administration.[2][12][4][13][page needed][14][15] Between 1860 and 1920, the British segregated Indians by caste, granting administrative jobs and senior appointments only to the upper castes. Social unrest during 1920s led to a change in this policy.[16] From then on, the colonial administration began a policy of positive discrimination by reserving a certain percentage of government jobs for the lower castes.

New developments took place after India achieved independence, when the policy of caste-based reservation of jobs was formalised with lists of Scheduled Castes (Dalit) and Scheduled Tribes (Adivasi). Since 1950, the country has enacted many laws and social initiatives to protect and improve the socioeconomic conditions of its lower caste population. These caste classifications for college admission quotas, job reservations and other affirmative action initiatives, according to the Supreme Court of India, are based on heredity and are not changeable.[17][a] Discrimination against lower castes is illegal in India under Article 15 of its constitution, and India tracks violence against Dalits nationwide.[18]

Though caste is considered as dominant feature of Hinduism, in Indian context, it has influenced other religions too like Christianity, Islam, Judaism and Sikhism in the Indian subcontinent.[19]

Definitions and concepts

Caste, varna and jāti

Varna

Main article: Varna (Hinduism)

Varna means colour, and was a framework for classifying people first used in Vedic Indian society.[20] It is referred to frequently in the ancient Indian texts.[21] The four classes were the Brahmins (priestly people), the Kshatriyas (also called Rajanyas, who were rulers, administrators and warriors), the Vaishyas (artisans, merchants, tradesmen and farming), and Shudras (labouring).[20] The varna categorisation implicitly had a fifth element, being those people deemed to be entirely outside its scope, such as tribal people and the untouchables.[22]

Jāti

Main article: Jāti

Jāti, meaning birth,[23] is mentioned much less often in ancient texts, where it is clearly distinguished from varna. There are four varna but thousands of jātis.[21] They are complex social groups that lack universally applicable definition or characteristic, and have been more flexible and diverse than was previously often assumed.[22]

Some scholars of caste have considered jāti to have its basis in religion, assuming that in India the sacred elements of life envelope the secular aspects; for example, the anthropologist Louis Dumont described the ritual rankings that exist within the jāti system as being based on the concepts of religious purity and pollution.[24] This view has been disputed by other scholars, who believe it to be a secular social phenomenon driven by the necessities of economics, politics, and sometimes also geography.[23][24][25][26] Jeaneane Fowler says that although some people consider jāti to be occupational segregation, in reality the jāti framework does not preclude or prevent a member of one caste from working in another occupation.[23] A feature of jātis has been that a person in a given jāti is frequently expected to marry someone from the same community.[27][28] This trait is, however, not always the case; for example, there were inter-religious marriages between Muslim rulers and Hindu Rajputs during the Mughal period and the Nair and Nambudiri communities of Kerala have practised hypergamy.[citation needed]

Jātis have existed in India among Hindus, Muslims, Christians and tribal people, and there is no clear linear order.[29]

Caste

Main article: Caste

The term caste is not an Indian word. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it is derived from the Portuguese casta, meaning "race, lineage, breed" and, originally, "‘pure or unmixed (stock or breed)".[30] There is no exact translation in Indian languages, but varna and jāti are the two most proximate terms.[31]

The sociologist G. S. Ghurye wrote in 1932 that, despite much study by many people,

we do not possess a real general definition of caste. It appears to me that any attempt at definition is bound to fail because of the complexity of the phenomenon. On the other hand, much literature on the subject is marred by lack of precision about the use of the term.[32]

Ronald Inden, the Indologist, agrees that there has been no universally accepted definition. For example, for some early European documenters it was though to correspond with the endogamous varnas referred to in ancient Indian scripts, and its meaning corresponds in the sense of estates. To later Europeans of the Raj era it was endogamous jātis, rather than varnas, that represented caste, such as the 2378 jātis that colonial administrators classified by occupation in the early 20th century.[33]

Arvind Sharma, a professor of comparative religion, notes that caste has been used synonymously to refer to both varna and jāti but that "serious Indologists now observe considerable caution in this respect" because, while related, the concepts are considered to be distinct.[34] In this he agrees with the Indologist Arthur Basham, who noted that the Portuguese colonists of India used casta to describe

... tribes, clans or families. The name stuck and became the usual word for the Hindu social group. In attempting to account for the remarkable proliferation of castes in 18th- and 19th-century India, authorities credulously accepted the traditional view that by a process of intermarriage and subdivision the 3,000 or more castes of modern India had evolved from the four primitive classes, and the term 'caste' was applied indiscriminately to both varna or class, and jāti or caste proper. This is a false terminology; castes rise and fall in the social scale, and old castes die out and new ones are formed, but the four great classes are stable. There are never more or less than four and for over 2,000 years their order of precedence has not altered."[21]

The sociologist Andre Beteille notes that, while varna mainly played the role of caste in classical Hindu literature, it is jāti that plays that role in present times. Varna represents a closed collection of social orders whereas jāti is entirely open-ended, thought of as a "natural kind whose members share a common substance." Any number of new jātis can be added depending on need, such as tribes, sects, denominations, religious or linguistic minorities and nationalities. Thus, "Caste" is not an accurate representation of jāti in English. Better terms would be ethnicity, ethnic identity and ethnic group.[35]

Flexibility

Sociologist Anne Waldrop observes that while outsiders view the term caste as a static phenomenon of stereotypical tradition-bound India, empirical facts suggest caste has been a radically changing feature. The term means different things to different Indians. In the context of politically active modern India, where job and school quotas are reserved for affirmative action based on castes, the term has become a sensitive and controversial subject.[36]

Sociologists such as M. N. Srinivas and Damle have debated the question of rigidity in caste. In their independent studies, they claim considerable flexibility and mobility in their caste hierarchies among the Kodava people of South India.[37][38]

Middle-ground between complexity and loose usage

Ghurye attempted to find a middle-ground between the complexity and the loose usage. He defined six characteristics of the Hindu caste system as a "social philosophy", being its state prior to the relatively modern corruption of this by theories of "rights and duties". He thought that these could be applied across the country, although he acknowledged that there were regional variations on the general theme.[39]

  • Strict segmentation of society, with the various groups being rigidly defined and membership of them determined by birth.
  • A hierarchical system that defines a ranking place for all of the castes
  • Limited choice of occupation, which is enforced within a caste as well as by other castes. A caste might follow more than one traditional occupation but its members would nonetheless be constrained to that range
  • The general practice of endogamy, although in some situations hypergamy is acceptable. Endogamy applies to the various sub-groups within a caste itself, preventing marriage between the sub-groups and sometimes imposing an additional geographical constraint, that one can only marry a person from the same gotra and the same place
  • Restrictions on dietary and social interactions that defines who could consume what and accept from whom. As with marriage arrangements, these restrictions apply at sub-caste level, not merely at the caste level
  • Physical segregation in, for example, villages. This is accompanied by limitations on movement and access, including to religious and educational areas and to basic facilities such as supplies of water. Again, this segregation applies at sub-caste level as well as at the higher level

Not everyone has agreed with the definition proposed by Ghurye, which in any event was intended as an exercise to reduce the gap between lax terminological usage and the realities of an immensely complex system, More recently, Graham Chapman is among those who have reiterated the complexity, and he notes that there are differences between theoretical constructs and the practical reality.[40]

History

Caste system in 19th century India
Seventy-two Specimens of Castes in India (18).jpg
Hindu musician
Seventy-two Specimens of Castes in India (16).jpg
Muslim merchant
Seventy-two Specimens of Castes in India (8).jpg
Sikh chief
Seventy-two Specimens of Castes in India (5).jpg
Arab soldier
Pages from Seventy-two Specimens of Castes in India according to Christian Missionaries in February 1837. They include Hindu, Muslim, Sikh and Arabs as castes of India.

Origins

There are at least two perspectives for the origins of the caste system in ancient and medieval India.[41][42] One focuses on the ideological factors which are claimed to drive the caste system and holds that caste is rooted in the four varnas. This perspective was particularly common among scholars of the British colonial era and was articulated by Dumont, who concluded that the system was ideologically perfected several thousand years ago and has remained the primary social reality ever since. This school justifies its theory primarily by citing Manusmriti and it disregards economic, political or historical evidence.[43][44]

The second school of thought focuses on socio-economic factors and claims that those drive the caste system. It believes caste to be rooted in the economic, political and material history of India.[45] This school, which is common among scholars of the post-colonial era — examples of whom being Berreman, Marriott, and Dirks — describes the caste system as an ever-evolving social reality that can only be properly understood by the study of historical evidence of actual practice and the examination of circumstances verifiable in the economic, political and material history of India.[46][47] This school has focussed on the historical evidence from ancient and medieval society in India, during the Muslim rule between the 12th and 18th centuries, and the policies of colonial British rule from 18th century to the mid-20th century.[48][49]

The first school has focused on religious ethnology and disregarded empirical evidence in history.[50] The second school has focused on empirical evidence and sought to understand the historical circumstances.[51] The second school has criticised the first school for its caste origin theory, claiming it has dehistoricised and decontextualised Indian society.[52][53]

Ritual kingship and "polluted" ritual occupations

According to Samuel, referencing George L. Hart, central aspects of the later Indian caste system were provided by pre-Vedic systems of ritual kingship. This system is testified in Tamil literature from the Sangam period (300 BCE – 200 CE) in southern India, but may have been more widespread, even in northern India, prior to the influences of later Vedic society.[54] This system centered on the ritual power of the king, who was "supported by a group of ritual and magical specialists of low social status,"[55] with their ritual occupations being considered 'polluted'. According to Hart, it may be this model which provided the concerns with the "pollution" of members of low status groups.[56]

Vedic varnas

The varnas originated in Vedic society (ca.1500-500 BCE). The first three groups, Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishya have parallels with other Indo-European societies, while the addition of the Shudras is probably a Brahmanical invention from northern India.[57]

The varna system is propounded in revered Hindu religious texts, and understood as idealised human callings.[58][59] The Purusha Sukta of the Rigveda and Manusmriti's comment on it, being the oft-cited texts.[60] Counter to these textual classifications, many revered Hindu texts and doctrines question and disagree with this system of social classification.[22]

Scholars have questioned the varna verse in Rigveda, noting that the varna therein is mentioned only once. The Purusha Sukta varna verse is now generally considered to have been inserted at a later date into the Vedic text, probably as a charter myth. Stephanie Jamison and Joel Brereton, a professor of Sanskrit and Religious studies, state, "there is no evidence in the Rigveda for an elaborate, much-subdivided and overarching caste system", and "the varna system seems to be embryonic in the Rigveda and, both then and later, a social ideal rather than a social reality".[61] In contrast to the lack of details about varna system in the Rigveda, the Manusmriti includes an extensive and highly schematic commentary on the varna system, but it too provides "models rather than descriptions".[62] Susan Bayly summarises that Manusmriti and other scriptures helped elevate Brahmin in the social hierarchy and these were a factor in the making of the varna system, but the ancient texts did not in some way "create the phenomenon of caste" in India.[63]

These varnas were not uniformly conceived. While in the Kuru Kingdom and the Panchala kingdom the Brahmins were regarded the highest varna, further eastwards on the Ganges plain, in the Kosala kingdom, the kshatriyas were regarded as the highest varna. Eventually the Kuru kingdom, where the Mahabarata was written, had the strongest influence on later Hindu society,[64][page needed][65][page needed] but the alternative stance is discernable in the Buddhist sutras, where Brahmans are being criticised by the Buddha, a kshatriya.[64][page needed]

Ancient Hindu texts suggest that the varna system was not rigid.[citation needed] There are examples of men born to families belonging to various castes performing tapasya and becoming maharishis.[citation needed] This flexibility permitted lower caste Valmiki who was a Shudra by birth to become a maharishi and compose the Ramayana, which was widely adopted and became a major Hindu scripture. The Mahabharata declares that birth ancestry, sacraments or study alone cannot decide whether a person is a Brahmin; only character and behaviour can do so.[citation needed] Other ancient texts cite numerous examples of individuals moving from one caste to another within their lifetimes.[37] During the Gupta period, kings of Shudra and Brahmin origin were as common as those of the Kshatriya varna, and the caste system was not wholly prohibitive and rigid.[66]

Jātis

Jeaneane Fowler, a professor of philosophy and religious studies, states it is impossible to determine how and why the jatis came in existence.[67] Susan Bayly, on the other hand, states that jati system emerged because it offered a source of advantage in an era of pre-Independence poverty, lack of institutional human rights, volatile political environment, and economic insecurity.[68]

According to Gupta, during the Mauryan period guilds developed,[9] which crystallised into jatis[9] in post-Mauryan times with the emergence of feudalism in India, which finally crystalised from the 7th to the 12th century.[69] However, other scholars dispute when and how jatis developed in Indian history. Barbara Metcalf and Thomas Metcalf, both professors of History, write, "One of the surprising arguments of fresh scholarship, based on inscriptional and other contemporaneous evidence, is that until relatively recent centuries, social organization in much of the subcontinent was little touched by the four varnas. Nor were jati the building blocks of society."[70]

According to Basham, ancient Indian literature refers often to varnas, but hardly if ever to jātis as a system of groups within the varnas. He concludes that "If caste is defined as a system of group within the class, which are normally endogamous, commensal and craft-exclusive, we have no real evidence of its existence until comparatively late times."[21]

Genetic studies

A recent series of research papers, by Reich et al. (2009), Metspalu et al. (2011), and Moorjani et al. (2013), make clear that India was peopled by two distinct groups ca. 50,000 years ago, which form the basis for the present population of India.[71][72] These two groups mixed between 4,200 to 1,900 years ago (2200 BCE-100 CE), whereafter a shift to endogamy took place.[73] According to Reich et al.,

Strong endogamy must have applied since then (average gene flow less than 1 in 30 per generation) to prevent the genetic signatures of founder events from being erased by gene flow. Some historians have argued that “caste” in modern India is an “invention” of colonialism in the sense that it became more rigid under colonial rule. However, our results suggest that many current distinctions among groups are ancient and that strong endogamy must have shaped marriage patterns in India for thousands of years.[71]

GaneshPrasad et al. (2013) studied "12 tribal and 19 non-tribal (caste) endogamous populations from the predominantly Dravidian-speaking Tamil Nadu state in the southernmost part of India."[74] According to GaneshPrasad et al., southern India was socially stratified already 4,000 to 6,000 years ago, which is best explained by "the emergence of agricultural technology in South Asia."[74] GaneshPrasad et al. conclude from their genetic study:

The social stratification (in Tamilnadu) was established 4,000 to 6,000 years ago and there was little admixture during the last 3,000 years, implying a minimal genetic impact of the Varna (caste) system from the historically-documented Brahmin migrations into the area.[74]

Second urbanisation (500-200 BCE)

Peter Masefield[75] in his review of caste situation in India, as described in the Nikāya texts period of Buddhism (3rd century BC to 5th century AD) notes that anyone could in principle perform any profession. These Buddhist texts identify some Brahmins to be farmers and in other professions. The text state that anyone, of any birth, could perform the priestly function,[76] and that the Brahmin took food from anyone, suggesting that strictures of commensality were as yet unknown. The Nikaya texts also imply that endogamy was not mandated. Masefield concludes, "if any form of caste system was known during the Nikaya period - and it is doubtful that it was - this was in all probability restricted to certain non-Aryan groups".[77]

Classical period (320-650 CE)

The Chinese records of 7th century AD on India make no mention of any caste system.[78]

The Mahabharata, whose final version is estimated to have been completed by about 4th century CE, discusses the Varna system in section 12.181.[79] It offers two models on Varna. The first model describes Varna as color-based system, through a character named Bhrigu, "Brahmins Varna was white, Kshtriyas was red, Vaishyas was yellow, and the Shudras' black".[80] This description is questioned by Bharadvaja who says that colors are seen among all the Varnas, that desire, anger, fear, greed, gried, anxiety, hunger and toil prevails over all human beings, that bile and blood flow from all human bodies, so what distinguishes the Varnas, he asks? The Mahabharata then declares, according to Alf Hiltebeitel, a professor of Religion, "There is no distinction of Varnas. This whole universe is Brahman. It was created formerly by Brahma, came to be classified by acts."[81] The epic then recites a behavioral model for Varna, that those who were inclined to anger, pleasures and boldness attained the Kshtriya Varna; those who were inclined to cattle rearing and living off the plough attained the Vaishyas; those who were fond of violence, covetousness and impurity attained the Shudras. The Brahmin class is modeled in the epic, as the archetype default state of man dedicated to truth, austerity and pure conduct.[82] In the Mahabharata and pre-medieval era Hindu texts, according to Hiltebeitel, "it is important to recognize, in theory, Varna is nongenealogical. The four Varnas are not lineages, but categories."[83]

Medieval period (ca. 650-1500 CE)

Scholars have tried to locate historical evidence for the existence and nature of varna and jati in documents and inscriptions of medieval India. Supporting evidence for the existence and nature of varna and jati systems in medieval India has been elusive, and contradicting evidence has emerged.[84][85]

Varna is rarely mentioned in extensive medieval era records of Andhra Pradesh, for example. This has led Cynthia Talbot, a professor of History and Asian Studies, to question whether varna was socially significant in the daily lives of this region. The mention of Jati is even rarer, through the 13th century. Two rare temple donor records from warrior families of the 14th century CE claim to be Shudras, one states that Shudras are the bravest, the other states Shudras are the purest.[84] Richard Eaton, a professor of History, writes, "anyone could become warrior regardless of social origins, nor do jati - another pillar of alleged traditional Indian society - appear as features of people's identity. Occupations were fluid." Evidence shows, states Eaton, that Shudras were part of the nobility, and many "father and sons had different professions, suggesting that social status was earned, not inherited" in the Hindu Kakatiya population, in the Deccan region of India, between 11th to 14th century CE.[86]

In Tamil Nadu region of India, studies by Leslie Orr, a professor of Religion, states, "Chola period inscriptions challenges our ideas about the structuring of (south Indian) society in general. In contrast to what Brahmanical legal texts may lead us to expect, we do not find that caste is the organising principle of society or that boundaries between different social groups is sharply demarcated."[87]

For northern Indian region, Susan Bayly writes, "until well into the colonial period, much of the subcontinent was still populated by people for whom the formal distinctions of caste were of only limited importance; Even in parts of the so-called Hindu heartland of Gangetic upper India, the institutions and beliefs which are now often described as the elements of traditional caste were only just taking shape as recently as the early eighteenth century - that is the period of collapse of Mughal period and the expansion of western power in the subcontinent."[88]

For west India, Dirk Kolff, a professor of Humanities, suggests open status social groups dominated Rajput history during the medieval period. He states, "The omnipresence of cognatic kinship and caste in North India is a relatively new phenomenon that only became dominant in the early Mughal and British periods respectively. Historically speaking, the alliance and the open status group, whether war band or religious sect, dominated medieval and early modern Indian history in a way descent and caste did not."[89]

Post-Mughal period

Susan Bayly, an anthropologist, notes that "caste is not and never has been a fixed fact of Indian life"[90] and the caste system as we know it today, as a "ritualised scheme of social stratification," developed in two stages during the post-Mughal period, from 1650 to 1850. Three sets of value played an important role in this development: priestly hierarchy, kingship, and ascetic renunciation.[11]

According to Bayly, the initial phase saw the rise of the "royal man of prowess." Kings, who associated their rule with priests and ascetics, became the focus-point for a caste-ideal which focused on martial and regal forms Those people who associated themselves with these ideals tried to create social barriers between themselves and the non-elite groups from which they often descended. An additional development was the reshaping of previously casteless forms of bhakti (devotion).[91]

The second stage started before the British conquest but culminated during their rule. In this phase Brahmins, together with scribes, ascetics and merchants who adhered to Brahmanical norms, gained a status which had a decisive influence on legal codes and colonial administrative practice. In this phase the so-called "pollution barrier" became for many the defining characteristic of the caste system. British rule, says Bayly, only intensified this already ongoing process of ritualisation, which was "already underway well before the colonial period."[92][b]

During British rule

Although the varnas and jatis have pre-modern origins, the caste system as it exists today is the result of the result of developments during the post-Mughal period and the British colonial regime, which made caste organisation a central mechanism of administration.[2][3][full citation needed][95][14]

Basis

Jati were the basis of caste ethnology during the British colonial era. In the 1881 census and thereafter, colonial ethnographers used caste (jati) headings, to count and classify people in what was then British India (now India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Burma).[96] The 1891 census included 60 sub-groups each subdivided into six occupational and racial categories, and the number increased in subsequent censuses.[97] The British colonial era census caste tables, states Susan Bayly, "ranked, standardised and cross-referenced jati listings for Indians on principles similar to zoology and botanical classifications, aiming to establish who was superior to whom by virtue of their supposed purity, occupational origins and collective moral worth". While bureaucratic British officials completed reports on their zoological classification of Indian people, some British officials criticised these exercises as being little more than a caricature of the reality of caste system in India. The British colonial officials used the census-determined jatis to decide which group of people were qualified for which jobs in the colonial government, and people of which jatis were to be excluded as unreliable.[98] These census caste classifications, states Gloria Raheja, a professor of Anthropology, were also used by the British officials over the late 19th century and early 20th century, to formulate land tax rates, as well as to frequently target some social groups as "criminal" castes and castes prone to "rebellion".[99]

The population then comprised about 200 million people, across five major religions, and over 500,000 agrarian villages, each with a population between 100 to 1,000 people of various age groups, which were variously divided into numerous castes. This ideological scheme was theoretically composed of around 3,000 castes, which in turn was claimed to be composed of 90,000 local endogamous sub-groups. [2][13][page needed][100][101][102]

Race science

Colonial administrator Herbert Hope Risley, an exponent of race science, used the ratio of the width of a nose to its height to divide Indians into Aryan and Dravidian races, as well as seven castes.[103][104]

Enforcement

From the 1850s, photography was used in Indian subcontinent by the British for anthropological purposes, helping classify the different castes, tribes and native trades. Included in this collection were Hindu, Muslim and Buddhist (Sinhalese) people classified by castes.[105] Above is an 1860s photograph of Rajputs, classified as the highest secular Hindu caste. Amongst the Rajput clans, Chohans, descendants of warrior princes, were classified as having the highest position.

The role of the British Raj on the caste system in India is controversial.[106] The caste system became legally rigid during the Raj, when the British started to enumerate castes during their ten-year census and meticulously codified the system.[13][page needed][100] Between 1860 and 1920, the British segregated Indians by caste, granting administrative jobs and senior appointments only to the upper castes.[16]

Nicholas Dirks has argued that Indian caste as we know it today is a "modern phenomenon,"[107][c] as caste was "fundamentally transformed by British colonial rule."[108] According to Dirks, before colonialism caste affiliation was quite loose and fluid, but the British regime enforced caste affiliation rigorously, and constructed a much more strict hierarchy than existed previously, with some castes being criminalised and others being given preferential treatment.[13][page needed][15]

De Zwart notes that the caste system used to be thought of as an ancient fact of Hindu life and that contemporary scholars argue instead that the system was constructed by the British colonial regime. He says that "jobs and education opportunities were allotted based on caste, and people rallied and adopted a caste system that maximized their opportunity". De Zwart also notes that post-colonial affirmative action only reinforced the "British colonial project that ex hypothesi constructed the caste system".[109]

Sweetman notes that the European conception of caste dismissed former political configurations and insisted upon an "essentially religious character" of India. During the colonial period, caste was defined as a religious system and was divorced from political powers. This made it possible for the colonial rulers to portray India as a society characterised by spiritual harmony in contrast to the former Indian states which they criticised as "despotic and epiphenomenal",[110][d] with the colonial powers providing the necessary "benevolent, paternalistic rule by a more 'advanced' nation".[111]

Further development

Assumptions about the caste system in Indian society, along with its nature, evolved during British rule.[106][e] Corbridge concludes that British policies of divide and rule of India's numerous princely sovereign states, as well as enumeration of the population into rigid categories during the 10-year census, particularly with the 1901 and 1911 census, contributed towards the hardening of caste identities.[114]

Social unrest during 1920s led to a change in this policy.[16] From then on, the colonial administration began a policy of positive discrimination by reserving a certain percentage of government jobs for the lower castes.[115]

In the round table conference held on August 1932, upon the request of Ambedkar, the then Prime Minister of Britain, Ramsay Macdonald made a Communal Award which awarded a provision for separate representation for the Muslims, Sikhs, Christians, Anglo-Indians, Europeans and Dalits. These depressed classes were assigned a number of seats to be filled by election from special constituencies in which voters belonging to the depressed classes only could vote. Gandhi went on a hunger strike against this provision claiming that such an arrangement would split the Hindu community into two groups. Years later, Ambedkar wrote that Gandhi's fast was a form of coercion.[116] This agreement, which saw Gandhi end his fast and Ambedkar drop his demand for a separate electorate, was called the Poona Pact.[citation needed]

After India achieved independence, the policy of caste-based reservation of jobs was formalised with lists of Scheduled Castes (Dalit) and Scheduled Tribes (Adivasi).[citation needed]

Ritualistic

Smelser and Lipset propose in their review of Hutton's study of caste system in colonial India the theory that individual mobility across caste lines may have been minimal in British India because it was ritualistic. They say that the sub-castes may have changed their social status over the generations by fission, re-location, and adoption of new external ritual symbols. Some of these evolutionary changes in social stratifications were seen in Europe, Japan, Africa and other regions as well; however, the difference between them may be the relative levels of ritualistic and secular referents. They also say that the colonial system may have affected the caste system social stratification. They note that British colonial power controlled economic enterprises and the political administration of India by selectively cooperating with upper caste princes, priests and landlords. This was colonial India's highest level caste strata, followed by second strata that included favoured officials who controlled trade, supplies to the colonial power and Indian administrative services. The bottom layer was tenant farmers, servants, wage labourers, indentured coolies and others. The colonial social strata acted in combination with the traditional caste system. It shut off economic opportunity, entrepreneurial activity by natives, or availability of schools, thereby worsening the limitations placed on mobility by the traditional caste system. They say that in America and Europe individual mobility was better than in India or other colonies around the world, because colonial stratification was missing and the system could evolve to become more secular and tolerant of individual mobility.[117]

Contemporary India

Caste politics

Societal stratification, and the inequality that comes with it, still exists in india,[118][119] and has been thoroughly criticised.[120] Government policies aim at reducing this inequality by reservation, quota for backward classes, but paradoxically also have created an incentive to keep this stratification alive. The Indian government officially recognises historically discriminated communities of India such as the Untouchables under the designation of Scheduled Castes, and certain economically backward Shudra castes as Other Backward Castes.[121]

Loosening of caste system

Leonard and Weller have surveyed marriage and genealogical records to study patterns of exogamous inter-caste and endogamous intra-caste marriages in a regional population of India between 1900-1975. They report a striking presence of exogamous marriages across caste lines over time, particularly since the 1970s. They propose education, economic development, mobility and more interaction between youth as possible reasons for these exogamous marriages.[122]

A 2003 article in The Telegraph claimed that inter-caste marriage and dating were common in urban India. Indian societal and family relationships are changing because of female literacy and education, women at work, urbanisation, the need for two-income families, and global influences through television. Female role models in politics, academia, journalism, business, and India's feminist movement have accelerated the change.[123]

Caste-related violence

Independent India has witnessed caste-related violence. According to a 2005 UN report, approximately 31,440 cases of violent acts committed against Dalits were reported in 1996.[124][125][page needed] The UN report claimed 1.33 cases of violent acts per 10,000 Dalit people. For context, the UN reported between 40 and 55 cases of violent acts per 10,000 people in developed countries in 2005.[126][page needed][127] One example of such violence is the Kherlanji Massacre of 2006.

Caste politics

Economic inequality

Economic inequality seems to be related to the influence of inherited social-economic stratification.[citation needed] A 1995 study notes that the caste system in India is a system of exploitation of poor low-ranking groups by more prosperous high-ranking groups.[118] In India, 36.3% of people own no land at all, 60.6% own about 15% of the land, with a very wealthy 3.1% owning 15% of the land.[119] A study by Haque reports that India contains both the largest number of rural poor, and the largest number of landless households on the planet. Haque also reports that over 90 percent of both scheduled castes (low-ranking groups) and all other castes (high-ranking groups) either do not own land or own land area capable of producing less than $1000 per year of food and income per household. However, over 99 percent of India's farms are less than 10 hectares, and 99.9 percent of the farms are less than 20 hectares, regardless of the farmer or landowner's caste. Indian government has, in addition, vigorously pursued agricultural land ceiling laws which prohibit anyone from owning land greater than mandated limits. India has used this law to forcibly acquire land from some, then redistribute tens of millions of acres to the landless and poor of the low-caste. Haque suggests that Indian lawmakers need to reform and modernise the nation's land laws and rely less on blind adherence to land ceilings and tenancy reform.[128][129]

In a 2011 study, Aiyar too notes that such qualitative theories of economic exploitation and consequent land redistribution within India between 1950 and 1990 had no effect on the quality of life and poverty reduction. Instead, economic reforms since the 1990s and resultant opportunities for non-agricultural jobs have reduced poverty and increased per capita income for all segments of Indian society.[130] For specific evidence, Aiyar mentions the following

Critics believe that the economic liberalisation has benefited just a small elite and left behind the poor, especially the lowest Hindu caste of dalits. But a recent authoritative survey revealed striking improvements in living standards of dalits in the last two decades. Television ownership was up from zero to 45 percent; cellphone ownership up from zero to 36 percent; two-wheeler ownership (of motorcycles, scooters, mopeds) up from zero to 12.3 percent; children eating yesterday's leftovers down from 95.9 percent to 16.2 percent ... Dalits running their own businesses up from 6 percent to 37 percent; and proportion working as agricultural labourers down from 46.1 percent to 20.5 percent.

Cassan has studied the differential effect within two segments of India's Dalit community. He finds India's overall economic growth has produced the fastest and more significant socio-economic changes. Cassan further concludes that legal and social program initiatives are no longer India's primary constraint in further advancement of India's historically discriminated castes; further advancement are likely to come from improvements in the supply of quality schools in rural and urban India, along with India's economic growth.[131]

Apartheid and discrimination

The maltreatment of Dalits in India has been described by some authors as "India's hidden apartheid".[120][132] Critics of the accusations point to substantial improvements in the position of Dalits in post-independence India, consequent to the strict implementation of the rights and privileges enshrined in the Constitution of India, as implemented by the Protection of Civil rights Act, 1955.[133] They also argue that the practise had disappeared in urban public life.[134][page needed]

Sociologists Kevin Reilly, Stephen Kaufman and Angela Bodino, while critical of caste system, conclude that modern India does not practice apartheid since there is no state-sanctioned discrimination.[135] They write that casteism in India is presently "not apartheid. In fact, untouchables, as well as tribal people and members of the lowest castes in India benefit from broad affirmative action programmes and are enjoying greater political power."[136]

A hypothesis that caste amounts to race has been rejected by some scholars.[137][138][139] Ambedkar, for example, wrote that "The Brahmin of Punjab is racially of the same stock as the Chamar of Punjab. The Caste system does not demarcate racial division. The Caste system is a social division of people of the same race." Various sociologists, anthropologists and historians have rejected the racial origins and racial emphasis of caste and consider the idea to be one that has purely political and economic undertones. Beteille writes that "the Scheduled Castes of India taken together are no more a race than are the Brahmins taken together. Every social group cannot be regarded as a race simply because we want to protect it against prejudice and discrimination", and that the 2001 Durban conference on racism hosted by the U.N. is "turning its back on established scientific opinion".[139]

Recognition

The Indian government officially recognises historically discriminated communities of India such as the Untouchables under the designation of Scheduled Castes, and certain economically backward Shudra castes as Other Backward Castes.[121][need quotation to verify] The Scheduled Castes are sometimes referred to as Dalit in contemporary literature. In 2001, Dalits comprised 16.2 percent of India's total population.[140] Of the one billion Hindus in India, it is estimated that Hindu Forward caste comprises 26%, Other Backward Class comprises 43%, Hindu Scheduled Castes (Dalits) comprises 22% and Hindu Scheduled Tribes comprises 9%.[141][page needed]

In addition to taking affirmative action for people of schedule castes and scheduled tribes, India has expanded its effort to include people from poor, backward castes in its economic and social mainstream. In 1990, the government reservation of 27% for Backward Classes on the basis of the Mandal Commission's recommendations. Since then, India has reserved 27 percent of job opportunities in government-owned enterprises and agencies for Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs). The 27 percent reservation is in addition to 22.5 percent set aside for India's lowest castes for last 50 years.[142]

Mandal commission

The Mandal Commission was established in 1979 to "identify the socially or educationally backward" and to consider the question of seat reservations and quotas for people to redress caste discrimination.[143] In 1980, the commission's report affirmed the affirmative action practice under Indian law, whereby additional members of lower castes—the other backward classes—were given exclusive access to another 27 percent of government jobs and slots in public universities, in addition to the 23 percent already reserved for the Dalits and Tribals. When V. P. Singh's administration tried to implement the recommendations of the Mandal Commission in 1989, massive protests were held in the country. Many alleged that the politicians were trying to cash in on caste-based reservations for purely pragmatic electoral purposes.

Many political parties in India have indulged in caste-based votebank politics. Parties such as Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP), the Samajwadi Party and the Janata Dal claim that they are representing the backward castes, and rely on OBC support, often in alliance with Dalit and Muslim support, to win elections.[144] In Uttar Pradesh, the BSP was able to garner a majority in the state assembly elections with the support of the high-caste Brahmin community.[citation needed]

Other Backward Classes (OBC)

The Mandal Commission covered more than 3000 castes under Other Backward Class (OBC) category, regardless of their affluence or economic status and stated that OBCs form around 52% of the Indian population. However, the National Sample Survey puts the figure at 32%.[145][146] There is substantial debate over the exact number of OBCs in India; it is generally estimated to be sizable, but many believe that it is lower than the figures quoted by either the Mandal Commission or the National Sample Survey.[147]

The reservation system has led to widespread protests, such as the 2006 Indian anti-reservation protests, with many complaining of reverse discrimination against the Forward Castes (the castes that do not qualify for the reservation).[citation needed]

In May 2011, the government approved a poverty, religion and caste census to identify poverty in different social backgrounds.[148] The census would also help the government to re-examine and possibly undo some of the policies which were formed in haste such as the Mandal Commission in order to bring more objectivity to the policies with respect to contemporary realities.[149] Critics of the reservation system believe that there is actually no social stigma at all associated with belonging to a backward caste and that because of the huge constitutional incentives in the form of educational and job reservations, a large number of people will falsely identify with a backward caste to receive the benefits. This would not only result in a marked inflation of the backward castes' numbers, but also lead to enormous administrative and judicial resources being devoted to social unrest and litigation when such dubious caste declarations are challenged.[150]

Affirmative action

Article 15 of the Constitution of India prohibits discrimination based on caste and Article 17 declared the practice of untouchability to be illegal.[151] In 1955, India enacted the Untouchability (Offences) Act (renamed in 1976, as the Protection of Civil Rights Act). It extended the reach of law, from intent to mandatory enforcement. The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was passed in India in 1989.[152]

  • The National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes was established to investigate, monitor, advise, and evaluate the socio-economic progress of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.[153]
  • A reservation system for people classified as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes has existed for over 50 years. The presence of privately owned free market corporations in India is limited and public sector jobs have dominated the percentage of jobs in its economy. A 2000 report estimated that most jobs in India were in companies owned by the government or agencies of the government.[154] The reservation system implemented by India over 50 years, has been partly successful, because of all jobs, nationwide, in 1995, 17.2 percent of the jobs were held by those in the lowest castes.[citation needed]
  • The Indian government classifies government jobs in four groups. The Group A jobs are senior most, high paying positions in the government, while Group D are junior most, lowest paying positions. In Group D jobs, the percentage of positions held by lowest caste classified people is 30% greater than their demographic percentage. In all jobs classified as Group C positions, the percentage of jobs held by lowest caste people is about the same as their demographic population distribution. In Group A and B jobs, the percentage of positions held by lowest caste classified people is 30% lower than their demographic percentage.
  • The presence of lowest caste people in highest paying, senior most position jobs in India has increased by ten-fold, from 1.18 percent of all jobs in 1959 to 10.12 percent of all jobs in 1995.[155]
  • In 2007, India elected K. G. Balakrishnan, a Dalit, to the office of Chief Justice.[156]
  • In 2007, Uttar Pradesh, the most populous state of India, elected Mayawati as the Chief Minister, the highest elected office of the state. BBC claims, "Mayawati Kumari is an icon for millions of India's Dalits, or untouchables as they used to be known."[157]
  • In 2009, the Indian parliament unanimously elected a Dalit,[158] Meira Kumar, as the first female speaker.

Efects of Government aid

In a 2008 study, Desai et al. focussed on education attainments of children and young adults aged 6–29, from lowest caste and tribal populations of India. They completed a national survey of over 100,000 households for each of the four survey years between 1983 and 2000.[159] They found a significant increase in lower caste children in their odds of completing primary school. The number of dalit children who completed either middle-, high- or college-level education increased three times faster than the national average, and the total number were statistically same for both lower and upper castes. However, the same study found that in 2000, the percentage of dalit males never enrolled in a school was still more than twice the percentage of upper caste males never enrolled in schools. Moreover, only 1.67% of dalit females were college graduates compared to 9.09% of upper caste females. The number of dalit girls in India who attended school doubled in the same period, but still few percent less than national average. Other poor caste groups as well as ethnic groups such as Muslims in India have also made improvements over the 16-year period, but their improvement lagged behind that of dalits and adivasis. The net percentage school attainment for Dalits and Muslims were statistically the same in 1999.

A 2007 nationwide survey of India by the World Bank found that over 80 percent of children of historically discriminated castes were attending schools. The fastest increase in school attendance by Dalit community children occurred during the recent periods of India's economic growth.[160]

A study by Darshan Singh presents data on health and other indicators of socio-economic change in India's historically discriminated castes. He claims:[161]

  • In 2001, the literacy rates in India's lowest castes was 55 percent, compared to a national average of 63 percent.
  • The childhood vaccination levels in India's lowest castes was 40 percent in 2001, compared to a national average of 44 percent.
  • Access to drinking water within household or near the household in India's lowest castes was 80 percent in 2001, compared to a national average of 83 percent.
  • The poverty level in India's lowest castes dropped from 49 percent to 39 percent between 1995 and 2005, compared to a national average change from 35 to 27 percent.

The life expectancy of various caste groups in modern India has been raised; but the Mohanty and Ram report suggests that poverty, not caste, is the bigger differentiation in life expectancy in modern India.[162]

Life expectancy statistics for Indian caste groups
Life expectancy at birth (in years)
Castes group 1998–1999 2005–2006
Lowest castes 61.5 64.6
Other backward castes 63.5 65.7
Poor, tribal populations 57.5 56.9
Poor, upper castes 61.9 62.7
National average 63.8 65.5

Among religions

While identified with Hinduism, caste systems are found in other religions on the Indian subcontinent, including groups of Buddhists, Christians and Muslims.[163][page needed][164][165][page needed]

Below is the distribution of population of each Religion by Caste Categories, obtained from merged sample of Schedule 1 and Schedule 10 of available data from the NSSO 55th (1999–2000) and NSSO 61st Rounds (2004–05) Round Survey[141]

Distribution of Population of each Religion by Caste Categories
Religion/Caste SCs STs OBCs Forward Caste/Others
Hinduism 22.2% 9% 42.8% 26%
Islam 0.8% 0.5% 39.2% 59.5%
Christianity 9.0% 32.8% 24.8% 33.3%
Sikhism 30.7% 0.9% 22.4% 46.1%
Jainism 0.0% 2.6% 3.0% 94.3%
Buddhism 89.5% 7.4% 0.4% 2.7%
Zoroastrianism 0.0% 15.9% 13.7% 70.4%
Others 2.6% 82.5% 6.25 8.7%
Total 19.7% 8.5% 41.1% 30.8%

Christians

Christians in India are sometimes stratified by caste as well as by their denomination and location. The caste distinction is based on their caste at the time that they or their ancestors converted to Christianity.[166]

The earliest reference to caste among Indian Christians comes from Kerala.[need quotation to verify] Duncan Forrester observes that "Nowhere else in India is there a large and ancient Christian community which has in time immemorial been accorded a high status in the caste hierarchy. ... Syrian Christian community operates very much as a caste and is properly regarded as a caste or at least a very caste-like group."[167] Amidst the Hindu society, the Saint Thomas Christians of Kerala had inserted themselves within the Indian caste society by the observance of caste rules and were regarded by the Hindus as a caste occupying a high place within their caste hierarchy.[168][169] Their traditional belief that their ancestors were high-caste Hindus such as Nambudiris and Nairs, who were evangelised by St. Thomas, has also supported their upper-caste status.[170] With the arrival European missionaries and their evangelistic mission among the so-called lower castes in Kerala, two new groups of Christians, called Latin Rite Christians and New Protestant Christians, were formed but they continued to be considered as lower castes by higher ranked communities, including the Saint Thomas Christians.[168]

Muslims

Contrary to the Qur'anic worldview, Muslims in India have trended towards a caste system. They tend to practice endogamy, hypergamy, hereditary occupations, and can even avoid social mixing.[171] There is some controversy[172] if these characteristics make them social groups or castes of Islam.

Indian Muslims are a mix of Sunni (majority), Shia and other sects of Islam. From the earliest days of Islam's arrival in South Asia, the Arabic, Persian and Afghan Muslims have been part of the upper, noble caste due to their lighter skin complexion.[171] The strict caste system of Hinduism caused many Hindus of lower classes to seek conversion to Islam to escape the caste system.[173] Meanwhile few upper caste Hindus converted to Islam and became part of the governing group of Sultanates and Mughal Empire. These two came to be known as nobles. Below them are the middle-class Muslims and then the converts from the Dalit (untouchable Hindus) communities.[171] The nobles have a superior status,[174][page needed][175][page needed] while the middle-class Muslims have a lower status. The untouchable castes of Hinduism who converted to Islam were regarded as lower class, as noted by anti-caste activists like Ambedkar, and by the British administrator Herbert Hope Risley who claimed more than 60 percent of Muslims in British India were of a caste equivalent in status as the Hindu Untouchables.[176][177] While other sources state an estimate between 75 and 80 percent.[178][full citation needed][179]

Castes are known as qaum among Muslims in India, as well as in Pakistan and Afghanistan.[180][181] Qaums are divided based on ethnic and cultural differences. They have patrilineal hereditary, with ranked occupations attributed to tribes and endogamy. Membership in a qaum is inherited by birth.[180] Barth identifies the origin of the stratification from the historical segregation between those of different complexion - the lighter complexion associated with purity in origin, the darker skinned Muslims regarded as poor and lower class.[182] Endogamy is very common in each Muslim qaum in the form of arranged consanguineous marriages among Muslims in India and Pakistan.[183] Malik states that the lack of religious sanction makes qaum a quasi-caste, and something that is found in Islam outside South Asia.[180]

Some assert that the Muslim castes are not as acute in their discrimination as those of the Hindus,[184] while critics of Islam assert that the discrimination in South Asian Muslim society is worse.[176] The fact remains that though a form of the caste system is practiced by Muslim South Asians, it is not mentioned in any scholarly understanding of Islam.[citation needed]

Sikh

Although the Sikh Gurus criticised the hierarchy of the caste system, one does exist in Sikh community. According to Sunrinder S, Jodhka, the Sikh religion does not advocate discrimination against any caste or creed, however, in practice, Sikhs belonging to the landowning dominant castes have not shed all their prejudices against the Dalits. While Dalits would be allowed entry into the village gurudwaras they would not be permitted to cook or serve langar (the communal meal). Therefore, wherever they could mobilise resources, the Dalits of Punjab have tried to construct their own gurudwara and other local level institutions in order to attain a certain degree of cultural autonomy.[185] In 1953, the Government of India acceded to the demands of the Sikh leader, Tara Singh, to include Sikh castes of the converted untouchables in the list of scheduled castes. In the Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee, 20 of the 140 seats are reserved for low-caste Sikhs.[186][187][page needed]

Buddhists

When Ywan Chwang traveled to South India after the period of the Chalukyan Empire, he noticed that the caste system had existed among the Buddhists and Jains.[188]

The upper castes belong to sger gzhis, and they are called sgar pa. The priestly caste belonged to monastery, and are called chos-gzhis. Miser are the serf caste. Serfs, the majority of the people, farmed and paid taxes. An individual's social status and lifelong occupation was destined by birth, closed, and depending on the family one was born into, the individual inherited a tenure document known as khral-rten. Buddhist castes had sub-castes, such as nang gzan,[189] khral pa and dud chung. Buddhist also had castes that were shunned by their community and ostracised, such as hereditary fishermen, butchers and undertakers. The untouchables in Buddhist regions, as in Tibet, are known as Ragyappa, who lived in isolated ghettos, and their occupation was to remove corpses (human or animal) and dispose of sewage.[190][191]

Jains

Jains also had castes in places such as Bihar.[citation needed]

Views and criticism

There has been criticism of the caste system from both within and outside of India.[192]

Indian social reformers

The caste system has been criticised by many Indian social reformers.

For example, Jyotirao Phule vehemently criticised any explanations that the caste system was natural and ordained by the Creator in Hindu texts. If Brahma wanted castes, argued Phule, he would have ordained the same for other creatures. There are no castes in species of animals or birds, so why should there be one among human animals. In his criticism Phule added, "Brahmins cannot claim superior status because of caste, because they hardly bothered with these when wining and dining with Europeans." Professions did not make castes, and castes did not decide one's profession. If someone does a job that is dirty, it does not make them inferior; in the same way that no mother is inferior because she cleans the excreta of her baby. Ritual occupation or tasks, argued Phule, do not make any human being superior or inferior.[193]

Vivekananda similarly criticised caste as one of the many human institutions that bars the power of free thought and action of an individual. Caste or no caste, creed or no creed, any man, or class, or caste, or nation, or institution that bars the power of free thought and bars action of an individual is devilish, and must go down. Liberty of thought and action, asserted Vivekananda, is the only condition of life, of growth and of well-being.[194]

Ambedkar and Nehru

A 1922 stereograph of Hindu children of high caste, Bombay. This was part of Underwood & Underwood stereoscope journey of colonial world. This and related collections became controversial for staging extreme effects and constructing identities of various colonised nations. Christopher Pinney remarks such imaging was a part of surveillance and imposed identities upon Indians that were resented.[195][196][197]

Ambedkar and Jawaharlal Nehru had radically different approaches to caste, especially concerning constitutional politics and the status of untouchables.[citation needed] Since the 1980s, caste has become a major issue in the politics of India.[198]

Views of Ambedkar

B. R. Ambedkar delivering a speech to a rally at Yeola, Nasik, on 13 October 1935

Views of Gandhi

In his younger years, Gandhi disagreed with some of Ambedkar's observations, rationale and interpretations about the caste system in India. "Caste," he claimed, has "saved Hinduism from disintegration. But like every other institution it has suffered from excrescences." He considered the four divisions of Varnas to be fundamental, natural and essential. The innumerable subcastes or Jātis he considered to be a hindrance. He advocated to fuse all the Jātis into a more global division of Varnas. In the 1930s, Gandhi began to advocate for the idea of heredity in caste to be rejected, arguing that "Assumption of superiority by any person over any other is a sin against God and man. Thus caste, in so far as it connotes distinctions in status, is an evil."[199]

He claimed that Varnashrama of the shastras is today nonexistent in practice. The present caste system is theory antithesis of varnashrama. Caste in its current form, claimed Gandhi, had nothing to do with religion. The discrimination and trauma of castes, argued Gandhi, was the result of custom, the origin of which is unknown. Gandhi said that the customs' origin was a moot point, because one could spiritually sense that these customs were wrong, and that any caste system is harmful to the spiritual well-being of man and economic well-being of a nation. The reality of colonial India was, Gandhi noted, that there was no significant disparity between the economic condition and earnings of members of different castes, whether it was a Brahmin or an artisan or a farmer of low caste. India was poor, and Indians of all castes were poor. Thus, he argued that the cause of trauma was not in the caste system, but elsewhere. Judged by the standards being applied to India, Gandhi claimed, every human society would fail. He acknowledged that the caste system in India spiritually blinded some Indians, then added that this did not mean that every Indian or even most Indians blindly followed the caste system, or everything from ancient Indian scriptures of doubtful authenticity and value. India, like any other society, cannot be judged by a caricature of its worst specimens. Gandhi stated that one must consider the best it produced as well, along with the vast majority in impoverished Indian villages struggling to make ends meet, with woes of which there was little knowledge.[200][201]

In popular culture

Mulk Raj Anand's debut novel, Untouchable (1935) based on the theme of untouchability. Hindi film, Achhoot Kanya (Untouchable Maiden, 1936) starring Ashok Kumar and Devika Rani was an early reformist film. The debut novel of Arundhati Roy, The God of Small Things (1997) also has themes surrounding the caste system. A lawyer named Sabu Thomas filed a petition to have the book published without the last chapter, which had graphic description of sexual acts between members of different castes.[202] Thomas claimed the alleged obscenity in the last chapter deeply hurts the Syrian Christian community, the basis of the novel.[203]

See also

References

Notes

  1. ^ These initiatives by India, over time, have led to many lower caste members being elected to the highest political offices including that of president, with the election of K. R. Narayanan, a Dalit, from 1997 to 2002.[17]
  2. ^ Sweetman notes that the Brahmin had a strong influence on the British understanding of India, thereby also influencing the British rule and western understandings of Hinduism, and gaining a stronger position in Indian society.[93][page needed] According to Sweetman, colonialism was "a significant factor in the reinforcement of their position and the acceleration of the 'brahmanisation' of Hindu society." The Brahmin castes preserved the texts which were studied by Europeans, and provided access to them. The authority of those texts was expanded by being the focus of study by Europeans. Brahmins and Europeans scholars shared a perception of "a general decline from an originally pure religion".[94]
  3. ^ Nicholas Dirks: "Rather, I will argue that caste (again, as we know it today) is a modern phenomenon, that it is, specifically, the product of an historical encounter between India and Western colonial rule. By this I do not mean to imply that it was simply invented by the too clever British, now credited with so many imperial patents that what began as colonial critique has turned into another form of imperial adulation. But I am suggesting that it was under the British that 'caste' became a single term capable of expressing, organizing, and above all 'systematizing' India's diverse forms of social identity, community, and organization. This was achieved through an identifiable (if contested) ideological canon as the result of a concrete encounter with colonial modernity during two hundred years of British domination. In short, colonialism made caste what it is today."
  4. ^ Sweetman cites Dirks (1993), The Hollow Crown, University of Michigan Press, p.xxvii
  5. ^ For example, some British believed Indians would shun train travel because tradition-bound South Asians were too caught up in caste and religion, and that they would not sit or stand in the same coaches out of concern for close proximity to a member of higher or lower or shunned caste. After the launch of train services, Indians of all castes, classes and gender enthusiastically adopted train travel without any concern for so-called caste stereotypes.[112][113]

Citations

  1. ^ Berreman (1972)
  2. ^ a b c d de Zwart (2000)
  3. ^ a b Bayly (2001), pp. 25-27, 392
  4. ^ a b St. John (2012), p. 103
  5. ^ Sathaye (2015)
  6. ^ a b Smith (2005), pp. 9522-9524
  7. ^ Sadangi (2008)
  8. ^ Jaffrelot (2006)
  9. ^ a b c Gupta (2000), p. 212
  10. ^ Robb (1997), pp. 91-99, 349-353
  11. ^ a b Bayly (2001), p. 26
  12. ^ Bayly (2001), p. 392
  13. ^ a b c d Dirks (2001)
  14. ^ a b Sathaye (2015), p. 214
  15. ^ a b Dirks (2006), p. 27
  16. ^ a b c Burguière & Grew (2001), pp. 215-229
  17. ^ a b Ex-India President Narayanan dies BBC News (2005)
  18. ^ CRIME AGAINST PERSONS BELONGING TO SCs / STs Government of India (2011), page 108
  19. ^ Cohen, Stephen P. (2001). India: Emerging Power. Brookings Institution Press. p. 21. ISBN 0815700067. 
  20. ^ a b Fowler (1997), pp. 19-20
  21. ^ a b c d Basham (1954), p. 148
  22. ^ a b c Bayly (2001), p. 9
  23. ^ a b c Fowler (1997), p. 23
  24. ^ a b Harrington, Austin (2006). Encyclopedia of social theory. Routledge. p. 49. ISBN 978-0-415-29046-3. 
  25. ^ Dirks (2001), pp. 57-60
  26. ^ Samuel (2008), p. 87-88
  27. ^ Bayly (2001), p. 10
  28. ^ Samuel (2008), p. 87
  29. ^ Ingold, Tim (1994). Companion encyclopedia of anthropology. Routledge. pp. 1026–1027. ISBN 978-0-41528-604-6. 
  30. ^ "Caste, n.". Oxford English Dictionary. 1989. 
  31. ^ Corbridge, Harriss & Jeffrey (2013), p. 239
  32. ^ Ghurye (1969), pp. 1–2
  33. ^ Inden (2001), p. 59
  34. ^ Sharma (2000), p. 132
  35. ^ Béteille (1996), pp. 15-25
  36. ^ Waldrop, Anne (2004). "Dalit Politics in India and New Meaning of Caste". Forum for Development Studies 31 (2). doi:10.1080/08039410.2004.9666283. (subscription required (help)). 
  37. ^ a b Silverberg (1969)
  38. ^ Srinivas (1952), p. 32
  39. ^ Ghurye (1969), pp. 2–22
  40. ^ Chapman (1993), pp. 10–14
  41. ^ McGilvray, Dennis (1982). Caste ideology and interaction. Cambridge University Press. p. 2. ISBN 978-0-521-24145-8. 
  42. ^ Hira Singh (2014). Recasting caste : from the sacred to the profane. SAGE Publications. pp. 23–32. ISBN 978-81-321-1346-1. 
  43. ^ Dirks (2001), pp. 55-58
  44. ^ Gupta (2000), p. 181
  45. ^ Bayly (2001), pp. 19-24
  46. ^ Gupta (2000), p. 180-183
  47. ^ Dirks (2001), pp. 56-57
  48. ^ Dirks (2001), pp. 38-43
  49. ^ Bayly (2001), pp. 38-43
  50. ^ Gupta (2000), p. 184
  51. ^ Bayly (2001), pp. 5-7
  52. ^ Dirks (2001), p. 59
  53. ^ Ganguly, Debjani (2005). Caste, colonialism and counter-modernity: notes on a postcolonial hermeneutics of caste. Routledge. pp. 5–10. ISBN 978-0-415-54435-1. 
  54. ^ Samuel (2008), p. 83-89.
  55. ^ Samuel (2008), p. 83.
  56. ^ Samuel (2008), p. 86, 88.
  57. ^ Samuel (2008), p. 86-87.
  58. ^ Bayly (2001), p. 8
  59. ^ Thapar (2004), p. 63
  60. ^ David Lorenzen (2006). Who invented Hinduism : essays on religion in History. Yoda Press. pp. 147–149. ISBN 978-81-902272-6-1. 
  61. ^ Jamison, Stephanie et al. (2014). The Rigveda : the earliest religious poetry of India. Oxford University Press. pp. 57–58. ISBN 978-0-19-937018-4. 
  62. ^ Ingold, Tim (1994). Companion encyclopedia of anthropology. Routledge. p. 1026. ISBN 978-0-415-28604-6. 
  63. ^ Bayly (2001), p. 29
  64. ^ a b Samuel (2008)
  65. ^ Witzel (1995)
  66. ^ Keay (2000), p. 189
  67. ^ Fowler (1997), pp. 23-24
  68. ^ Bayly (2001), pp. 263-264
  69. ^ Gupta (2000), p. 218
  70. ^ Barbara Metcalf, Thomas Metcalf (2012). A concise history of modern India. Cambridge University Press. p. 24. ISBN 978-1-107-02649-0. 
  71. ^ a b http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2842210/ Reich et al. 2009, Reconstructing Indian Population History]
  72. ^ Shared and Unique Components of Human Population Structure and Genome-Wide Signals of Positive Selection in South Asia, Mait Metspalu et al., American Journal of Human Genetics, Volume 89, Issue 6, 9 December 2011, Pages 731–744.
  73. ^ Moorjani, P., Thangaraj, K., Patterson, N., Lipson, M., Loh, P. R., Govindaraj, P., ... & Singh, L. (2013). Genetic evidence for recent population mixture in India. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 93(3), 422-438
  74. ^ a b c GaneshPrasad et al (2013), Population Differentiation of Southern Indian Male Lineages Correlates with Agricultural Expansions Predating the Caste System
  75. ^ Masefield, Peter (1986). Divine revelation in Pali Buddhism. Routledge. p. 148-151. ISBN 978-955-9028-02-4. 
  76. ^ Masefield, Peter (1986). Divine revelation in pali buddhism. Routledge. p. 148-151. ISBN 978-955-9028-02-4. 
  77. ^ Masefield, Peter (1986). Divine revelation in pali buddhism. Routledge. p. 148-151. ISBN 978-955-9028-02-4. 
  78. ^ Masefield, Peter (1986). Divine revelation in pali buddhism. Routledge. p. 148-151. ISBN 978-955-9028-02-4. 
  79. ^ Hiltebeitel, Alf (2011). Dharma : its early history in law, religion, and narrative. Oxford University Press. pp. 529–531. ISBN 978-0-19-539423-8. 
  80. ^ Hiltebeitel, Alf (2011). Dharma : its early history in law, religion, and narrative. Oxford University Press. pp. 529–531. ISBN 978-0-19-539423-8. 
  81. ^ Hiltebeitel, Alf (2011). Dharma : its early history in law, religion, and narrative. Oxford University Press. pp. 529–531. ISBN 978-0-19-539423-8. 
  82. ^ Hiltebeitel, Alf (2011). Dharma : its early history in law, religion, and narrative. Oxford University Press. p. 532. ISBN 978-0-19-539423-8. 
  83. ^ Hiltebeitel, Alf (2011). Dharma : its early history in law, religion, and narrative. Oxford University Press. p. 594. ISBN 978-0-19-539423-8. 
  84. ^ a b Talbot (2001), pp. 50-51
  85. ^ Orr, Leslie (2000). Donors, devotees, and daughters of God temple women in medieval Tamilnadu. Oxford University Press. pp. 30–31. ISBN 978-0-19-509962-1. 
  86. ^ Eaton, Richard (2008). A social history of the Deccan, 1300-1761. Cambridge University Press. pp. 15–16. ISBN 978-0-521-51442-2. 
  87. ^ Orr, Leslie (2000). Donors, devotees, and daughters of God temple women in medieval Tamilnadu. Oxford University Press. p. 30. ISBN 978-0-19-509962-1. 
  88. ^ Bayly (2001), pp. 3-4
  89. ^ Kolff, Dirk (2002). Naukar, Rajput, and sepoy : the ethnohistory of the military labour market in Hindustan, 1450-1850. Cambridge University Press. pp. 198–199. ISBN 978-0-521-52305-9. 
  90. ^ Bayly (2001), p. 25
  91. ^ Bayly (2001), p. 26-27
  92. ^ Bayly (2001), p. 27
  93. ^ Sweetman (2004)
  94. ^ Sweetman (2004), p. 13
  95. ^ St. John (2012), p. 103
  96. ^ Bayly (2001), pp. 125-126
  97. ^ Dirks (2001), pp. 212-217
  98. ^ Bayly (2001), pp. 125-127
  99. ^ Raheja, Gloria (2000). Colonial subjects : essays on the practical history of anthropology (editors: Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink). University of Michigan Press. pp. 120–122. ISBN 978-0-472-08746-4. 
  100. ^ a b Stokes (1973)
  101. ^ Dudley-Jenkins, Laura (October 2009). Identity and Identification in India (see review of sociology journal articles starting page 42). Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-56062-7. 
  102. ^ Bates, Crispin (1995). "Race, Caste and Tribe in Central India: the early origins of Indian anthropometry" (PDF). Edinburgh Papers In South Asian Studies (3). 
  103. ^ Trautmann (1997)
  104. ^ Walsh (2011)
  105. ^ "Online Collection (The Riddell Gifts)". National Galleries of Scotland. 1985. 
  106. ^ a b Stokes (1980), pp. 38-43
  107. ^ Dirks (2001), p. 5.
  108. ^ Dirks, Nicholas (2006). The Scandal of Empire. Harvard University Press. p. 27. ISBN 9780674021662. The institution of caste, for example, a social formation that has been seen as not only basic to India but part of its ancient constitution, was fundamentally transformed by British colonial rule. 
  109. ^ de Zwart (2000), p. 235.
  110. ^ Sweetman (2004), pp. 14-15
  111. ^ Sweetman (2004), p. 14
  112. ^ Kerr, Ian (2007). Engines of change: the railroads that made India. Praeger Publishers. pp. 89–99. ISBN 0-275-98564-4. 
  113. ^ Arnold, David (January 1983). "White colonization and labour in 19th century India". Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History XI (2): 133–157. doi:10.1080/03086538308582635. 
  114. ^ Corbridge & Harriss (2000), pp. 8, 243
  115. ^ The Economist (29 June 2013), Affirmative Action, India Reservations
  116. ^ Omvedt, Gail (2012). "A Part That Parted". Outlook India. Retrieved 2012-08-12. 
  117. ^ Smelser & Lipset (2005), pp. 8-15, 160-174
  118. ^ a b India – A Country Study, USA Library of Congress, 1995, Chapter 5.
  119. ^ a b Rural Poverty Report 2001 - The Challenge of Ending Rural Poverty, Chapter 3, p. 77. IFAD, 2001.
  120. ^ a b Gopal Guru, with Shiraz Sidhva. India's "hidden apartheid"[dead link].
  121. ^ a b Gosal, R. P. S. (September 1987). "Distribution of scheduled caste population in India". Social Science Information 26 (3): 493–511. doi:10.1177/053901887026003002. 
  122. ^ Leonard, Karen; Weller, Susan (August 1980). "Declining subcaste endogamy in India: the Hyderabad Kayasths, 1900–75" (PDF). American Ethnologist 7 (3). doi:10.1525/ae.1980.7.3.02a00080. 
  123. ^ "THE DOLLAR BRIDES—Indian girls marrying NRIs often escape to a hassle-free life". The Telegraph (Calcutta, India). 28 January 2003. 
  124. ^ "UN report slams India for caste discrimination". CBC News. 2 March 2007.
  125. ^ "Caste, Ethnicity and Exclusion in South Asia: The Role of Affirmative Action Policies in Building Inclusive Societies" (PDF). 
  126. ^ "Crime statistics, 87 major countries". UN ODC. 2007. 
  127. ^ "Crimes and Crime Rates by Type of Offense: 1980 to 2009" (PDF). Census—US. 2010. 
  128. ^ Hanstad (2005). "Improving land access to India's rural poor" (PDF). The World Bank. 
  129. ^ Haque (2006). "IMPROVING THE RURAL POORS' ACCESS TO LAND IN INDIA" (PDF). DARPG, Government of India. 
  130. ^ Aiyar, Swaminathan S. Anklesaria (July 2011). "The Elephant That Became a Tiger, 20 Years of Economic Reform in India" (PDF). 
  131. ^ Cassan, Guilhem (September 2011). "The Impact of Positive Discrimination in Education in India: Evidence from a Natural Experiment" (PDF). Paris School of Economics and Laboratoire d'Economie Appliquee. 
  132. ^ William A. Haviland, Anthropology: The Human Challenge, 13th edition, Thomson Wadsworth, 2010, ISBN 978-0-495-81084-1, p. 536 (see note 9).
  133. ^ The Constitution of India by P.M. Bakshi, Universal Law Publishing Co, ISBN 81-7534-500-4.
  134. ^ Mendelsohn & Vicziany (1998)
  135. ^ Kevin Reilly, Stephen Kaufman, Angela Bodino, Racism: A Global Reader P21, M.E. Sharpe, 2003 ISBN 0-7656-1060-4.
  136. ^ Excerpts from The Constitution of India.
  137. ^ "An Untouchable Subject?". Npr.org. 29 August 2001. Retrieved 20 January 2013. 
  138. ^ Ambedkar, B. R. (1979). Writings and Speeches 1. Education Department, Government of Maharashtra. p. 49. 
  139. ^ a b Beteille (2001)
  140. ^ "Scheduled castes and scheduled tribes population: Census 2001". Government of India. 2004. 
  141. ^ a b Sachar, Rajinder (2006). "Sachar Committee Report (2004–2005)" (PDF). Government of India. Retrieved 2008-09-27. 
  142. ^ "Annual Report, 2007–2008" (PDF). National Commission for Backward Classes, Government of India. 2009. 
  143. ^ Bhattacharya, Amit. "Who are the OBCs?". Archived from the original on 27 June 2006. Retrieved 19 April 2006.  Times of India, 8 April 2006.
  144. ^ "Caste-Based Parties". Country Studies US. Retrieved 12 December 2006. 
  145. ^ Reply to SC daunting task for government, Tribune India.
  146. ^ "Central List of Other Backward Castes". National Commission in Backward Classes, Government of India. 
  147. ^ What is India's population of other backward classes?,Yahoo News.
  148. ^ "Caste, religion, poverty census gets Cabinet nod". NDTV. 19 May 2011. Retrieved 23 July 2014. 
  149. ^ "Caste and the Census". The Hindu (Chennai, India). 
  150. ^ "Caste in doubt". Indian Express. 17 May 2010. Retrieved 20 January 2013. 
  151. ^ "Constitution of India". Ministry of Law, Government of India. Retrieved 2012. 
  152. ^ "India: (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; No. 33 of 1989". Human Rights Watch. 1989. 
  153. ^ "About NCST". Government of India. 2011. 
  154. ^ Marc Galanter, Competing Equalities: Law and the Backward Classes in India. Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1984, 84-85
  155. ^ "Caste-based Discrimination in International Human Rights Law", p. 257, by David Keane
  156. ^ "K G Balakrishnan, first Dalit Chief Justice of India". 22 December 2006. Retrieved 14 November 2014. 
  157. ^ "Profile: Mayawati Kumari". BBC News. 16 July 2009. 
  158. ^ "Meira Kumar, a Dalit leader is the new Lok Sabha Speaker". NCHRO. 2009. 
  159. ^ Desai and Kulkarni (May 2008). "Changing Educational Inequalities in India in the Context of Affirmative Action". Demography 45 (2): 245–270. doi:10.1353/dem.0.0001. PMC 2474466. PMID 18613480. 
  160. ^ Shankar, Deepa (2007). "What is the progress in elementary education participation in India during the last two decades?" (PDF). The World Bank. 
  161. ^ Singh, Darshan (2009). "DEVELOPMENT OF SCHEDULED CASTES IN INDIA – A REVIEW" (PDF). Journal of Rural Development 28 (4): 529–542. 
  162. ^ Mohanty and Ram (November 2010). "LIFE EXPECTANCY AT BIRTH AMONG SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC GROUPS IN INDIA" (PDF). International Institute for Population Sciences. 
  163. ^ Barth, Fredrik (1962). "The System of Social Stratification in Swat, North Pakistan". In Leach, E. R. Aspects of Caste in South India, Ceylon, and North-West Pakistan. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-09664-5. 
  164. ^ Mills, Martin A. (2002). Identity, Ritual and State in Tibetan Buddhism: The Foundations of Authority in Gelukpa Monasticism. Routledge. pp. 40–41. ISBN 978-0-7007-1470-4. 
  165. ^ Ballhatchet, Kenneth (1998). Caste, Class and Catholicism in India 1789–1914. ISBN 978-0-7007-1095-9. 
  166. ^ Christian Castes Encyclopædia Britannica.
  167. ^ Forrester (1980), pp. 98, 102
  168. ^ a b Amaladass, Anand (1993) [1989]. "Dialogue between Hindus and the St. Thomas Christians". In Coward, Harold. Hindu-Christian dialogue: perspectives and encounters. Motilal Banarsidass. pp. 14–20. ISBN 81-208-1158-5. 
  169. ^ Bayly (2004), pp. 243-253
  170. ^ Fuller, Christopher J. (December 1977). "Indian Christians: Pollution and Origins". Man. New 12 (3/4): 528–529. 
  171. ^ a b c Chaudhary (2013), p. 149
  172. ^ Ahmad, Imtiaz (13 May 1967). "The Ashraf and Ajlaf Categories in Indo-Muslim Society". Economics and Political Weekly 2 (19): 687. JSTOR 4357934. (subscription required (help)). 
  173. ^ http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/denied-temple-access-dalit-converts-to-islam/article6991578.ece?homepage=true
  174. ^ Aggarwal, Pratap (1978). Caste and Social Stratification Among Muslims in India. Manohar. 
  175. ^ Bhatty, Zarina (1996). "Social Stratification Among Muslims in India". In Srinivas, M. N. Caste: Its Twentieth Century Avatar. Viking. 
  176. ^ a b Ambedkar, Bhimrao. Pakistan or the Partition of India. Book Traders. 
  177. ^ Risley, Herbert Hope (1903). Ethnographic Appendices, in GOI, Census of India, 1901 (see tables on Ajlaf and Arzal, and Risley discussion of these Muslim castes versus Hindu castes) 1. Calcutta: Office of the Superintendent of Government Printing. pp. 45–62. ISBN 978-1-246-03552-0. 
  178. ^ Hamermesh, M. Caste at birth
  179. ^ Chowdhuri Parkash, J. (2012). Caste system, social inequalities and reservation policy in India: Class, caste, social policy and governance through social justice. LAP LAMBERT Academic Publishing.
  180. ^ a b c Malik, Jamal (2008). Islam in South Asia: A Short History. Brill Academic. pp. 152–153. ISBN 978-9-00416-859-6. 
  181. ^ Leach, Edmund Ronald (1971). Aspects of Caste in South India, Ceylon and North-West Pakistan. Cambridge University Press. p. 113. 
  182. ^ Barth, Fredrik (1965). Political Leadership among Swat Pathans. London School of Economics/Berg. pp. 16–21. ISBN 978-0-48519-619-1. 
  183. ^ Shami; Grant; Bittles (1994). "Consanguineous marriage within social/occupational class boundaries in Pakistan". Journal of Biosocial Science 26 (1): 91–96. 
  184. ^ Madan, T. N., ed. (1976). Muslim Communities of South Asia: Culture and Society. Vikas Publishing House. p. 114. 
  185. ^ Jodhka, Surinder S. (11 May 2002). "Caste and Untouchability in Rural Punjab". Economic and Political Weekly 37 (19): 1822. JSTOR 4412102. (subscription required (help)). 
  186. ^ "The Scheduled Castes in the Sikh Community – A Historical Perspective". 
  187. ^ Puri, Harish K. (2004). Dalits in Regional Context. ISBN 978-81-7033-871-0. 
  188. ^ Prasad, Durga. History of the Andhras up to 1565 A. D. p. 115. 
  189. ^ Goldstein, Melvyn (1988). "Freedom, Servitude and the Servant-serf Nyima: a re-rejoinder to Miller" (PDF). The Tibet Journal 14 (2): 56–60. 
  190. ^ Grunfeld, A. T. (1996). The Making of Modern Tibet. ISBN 1-56324-713-5. 
  191. ^ Passin, Herbert (October 1955). "Untouchability in the Far East". Monumenta Nipponica 11 (3). JSTOR 2382914. (subscription required (help)). 
  192. ^ India's caste system discriminates.
  193. ^ Singh and Roy (2011). Indian Political Thought: Themes and Thinkers. Pearson. pp. 82–90. ISBN 978-81-317-5851-9. 
  194. ^ Swami Vivekananda (1952). The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda (8 vols., Calcutta) V. pp. 25–30. ISBN 978-81-85301-46-4. 
  195. ^ Gupta (20 September 2008). "Visual history tells us about repressed histories first=Trisha". Tehelka. 
  196. ^ Pinney, Christopher (1998). Camera Indica: The Social Life of Indian Photographs. University Of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-66866-6. 
  197. ^ Fraser, Sarah (2010). "The Face of China: Photography's Role in Shaping Image, 1860—1920". Getty Research Journal (2): 39–52. 
  198. ^ Aditya Nigam. "Caste Politics in India". Retrieved 11 December 2006. [dead link]
  199. ^ Changes in Mahatma Gandhi's views on caste and intermarriage
  200. ^ Ambedkar, B. R. (1917). "CASTES IN INDIA: Their Mechanism, Genesis and Development". 
  201. ^ M.K. Gandhi (1936). Collected works of Mahatama Gandhi; Dr. Ambedkar's Indictment — I & II (see pages 205–207 for part I, and pages 226–227 for part II, see other pages on castes as well) (PDF). 69: 16 May 1936—19 OCTOBER. 
  202. ^ "The God of Small Things Background". 
  203. ^ "Obscenity case slammed against Arundhati Roy". Rediff.com. Retrieved 20 January 2013. 

Bibliography

  • Mendelsohn, Oliver; Vicziany, Maria (1998), The Untouchables, Subordination, Poverty and the State in Modern India, Cambridge University Press 
  • Robb, Peter (1997), The Concept of Race in South Asia (2nd ed.), Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0-19564-268-1 

Further reading

External links