Revival: Caste (1950)

A Comparative Study

Arthur Maurice Hocart

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2018
• Print ISBN: 9781138564923
• eBook ISBN: 9781351346252
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: Asian History
• Index: History

The aim of this book is to persuade the reader that the Indian caste system is not the isolated phenomenon it is often thought to be. But a species of a very widespread genus. Not being an isolated phenomenon, it cannot be understood in isolation; it will merely be misunderstood. More than once it will be shown in these pages how localised specialism leads why from the truth and comparative study returns to it. Comparison also saves time by cutting the tangled knots which controversy ties round texts.

India

I

SO much has been written about caste without bringing about a decision in favour of any particular theory that the public is perhaps a little weary of the discussion. Yet the late M. Senart’s admirable reasoning¹ has shown that definite progress can be made. He has, I think, achieved a positive result in disposing of two theories, the occupational and the racial, which are derived rather from preconceived notions about primitive society than from the facts they profess to explain, and least of all from the point of view of the people who have developed the system and work it at the present day, and who are therefore our best guides. The occupational theory, for instance, seizing upon the obvious fact that caste and profession or trade are closely connected, hastily concludes that caste is based solely on a man’s occupation, and is the inevitable result of specialization in arts and crafts. If it had gone a little deeper it would have found that caste and craft are by no means as identical as is commonly supposed in Europe. Since this idea that an Indian is predestined to his craft by heredity is one of the main obstacles in the way of understanding the caste system we may be excused for dwelling on this point even after M. Senart’s cogent little treatise.

It is not the case that an Indian has no choice of occupation, but must follow that of his father, shave or cook or fish, as his father did. I have had to explain to tourists labouring under that misconception that my coolie gang, for instance, included anything from farmers, who probably had never handled a plough or sown a seed, down to drummers who may not know one end of the drum from the other, and cobblers who had never stitched a shoe; that the bar and commerce of Ceylon are largely in the hands of fishermen who would scorn to fish; that my food has been cooked by a farmer, by one who styles himself a merchant, but never, to my knowledge, by a member of the cook caste. Not all washermen wash, nor because you see a person washing are you safe in concluding that he is a washerman by caste. The state of affairs in Ceylon is this: a man may wash his own clothes; the mother, the elder sister, any one in the family can wash the clothes, “but,” says my informant, “we do not take outside washing; it would be a disgrace to the caste.” If clothes are given out to be washed, as is usual, they will be given to a washerman, if one is available; otherwise to a man of some other low caste. Not every man who drums is a drummer: in Ceylon you can often see women of good caste sitting round a big drum,¹ and whiling away the idleness of a festive day with varying rhythms; but neither their sex nor their caste would officiate as public drummers at a temple, a wedding, or a funeral. Farming is the vocation of the highest caste in Ceylon, yet washermen so habitually till the fields that they have special field superintendents who are distinguished by a different title from the field superintendents of the farmer folk.² This latitude is not modern, not brought about by the disturbing influence of European example, for Manu allows the priestly caste to live by agriculture and trade, a permission of which Brahmans in South India avail themselves.³ The royal state was the prerogative of the royal or noble caste;¹ yet in ancient days low caste men, washermen and others, not uncommonly became kings.²

Evidently the common European notion that caste is hereditary handicraft does not tally with the facts. We must conclude that it derives from some other principle. We must search for that principle not in our minds, but in the minds of those people who practise the caste system, who have daily experience of it, and are thus most likely to have a feeling for what is essential in it.

If I go to seek for it among the Sinhalese and the Ceylon Tamils, it is for the simple reason that it is the only part of the Indian world where I have experience of caste as a living organism. Apart from that, it is not a bad area to seek in; for Ceylon, in spite of its roads, estates, Colombo, and a swarm of officials, still remains very archaic in some respects. One still gets some of the atmosphere of the Jatakas, that is of a very ancient India, long before the advent of Mohammedanism. The sequel will demonstrate this to some extent.

II

Before we can ask the people themselves with any hope of understanding them what is their idea of caste, we must have some acquaintance with the facts of the system, for they will inevitably assume some such knowledge, and if we have not got it we shall be talking at cross purposes. I will therefore give a very brief outline of the hierarchy as it exists in Ceylon.

The first caste among the Sinhalese was once the royal one, but it is now extinct. The former existence of the brahmanic or priestly caste is attested by ancient writings and by such place names as “brahman village”. The disappearance of these two castes leaves the first rank to the farmers. They must once have shared equal honours with the merchants, a caste the former existence of which can be inferred from village names and the names of ancient streets.¹ Curiously enough this farmer aristocracy forms the vast majority of the population of the old Kandyan kingdom. On the coast their predominance is much reduced by the presence in great force of fishermen.

The members of the three leading castes, extinct or surviving, are known as the “good people.” They are opposed to the “low castes,” who comprise fishermen, smiths, washermen to the “good people,” tailors, potters, weavers, cooks, lime-burners, grass-cutters, drummers, charcoal burners, washermen to the low castes, matmakers, and, most despised of all, the Rodiyas, shunned by everyone.² These castes are again often subdivided: there are different ranks of farmers, and the fishermen are divided according as they fish with nets, rods, boats, and so on; the vahunpura and the durava are said to be an upper and a lower division of the same caste.

The Tamils of the North of Ceylon have much the same castes: the kings are extinct, the brahmans and merchants imported, so that the farmers again are the highest indigenous caste; then come the low castes.

Manu also contrasts the “good people” with the lowest.³ The division can be traced to the earliest literature where the aristocracy are called ārya, that is “worthy,” “noble,” as opposed to śūdra, a term of uncertain origin which may be translated “serf.” The aristocracy was distinguished by wearing a sacred thread over the left shoulder, and was subdivided into kings, priests, and farmers. The first two again form an aristocracy within the aristocracy.¹ It has been much debated whether the farmers of Ceylon are the lineal descendants of the original farmer caste, the vaiśya, or whether they are a low caste that now finds itself at the head of society owing to the demise of the upper three. Since the Tamil farmers used to admit that they were śūdra, and do not wear the sacred thread, the second view seems to be the right one. But this discussion is of no interest for us: this is not a legal argument; we are no more concerned with the question whether the Ceylon farmers are heirs of the body of the ancient farmers or not than the student of the institution of monarchy is concerned with the legitimacy of the House of Hanover; all we need trouble about is whether the Ceylon farmers occupy the place and perform the functions of the old farmer caste or not. This they undoubtedly do, holding such ranks as village headman, and all the offices of state other than the priestly ones, feeding the king and temple, and receiving service from the lower castes. Modern Sinhalese society thus differs from the ancient one only in so far as the aristocracy is single and no longer threefold.

In addition to the four castes Buddhist writings occasionally mention a fifth which is in one place called “low one,” as opposed to the exalted one of the kings and priests. This low caste is composed of five divisions: caṇḍāla, bamboo-workers, hunters, chariot-makers, scavengers. Manu, on the other hand, declares that there is no fifth caste, and it is evident that the term “caste” is only applied to this group loosely: they form no part of the four caste system, but lie outside it; and there is no general term for them, so that Buddhist writings have to refer to them by the name of the first division or a compound of the first and last. They are not allowed to dwell in the city or the village, whereas the serfs or artisans have a definite quarter assigned to them. Manu will not allow them a permanent residence at all; and they are called “known by day” because they may not appear in public except in the daytime.¹ In short they lie outside the pale of society with its fourfold division, and they are rightly described by Europeans as outcastes. I am not aware that at the present time any distinction is made in Ceylon between low castes and people outside the caste system, outcastes. Yet, if the term does not exist, the institution does: the Rodiyas are completely outside the pale; they do not, like the barbers, drummers, and the rest, form a necessary part of the social system, fulfilling certain indispensable functions; but they are completely excluded. “They are,” says Knox, “to this day so detestable to the People, that they are not permitted to fetch water out of their Wells; but do take their water out of Holes or Rivers. Neither will any touch them lest they should be defiled…. They do beg for their living; and that with so much importunity, as if they had a Patent for it from the King, and will not be denied.”

We need not insist on the restrictions to which the intercourse between one caste and another is subject, since it is th...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Original Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• FOREWORD
• PREFACE
• ABBREVIATIONS AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
• INDIA
• PERSIA
• FIJI
• TONGA
• SAMOA
• ROTUMA
• ROME
• GREECE
• EGYPT
• ORIGINS AND TENDENCIES
• INDEX