Dr. V.K.Maheshwari, M.A (Socio, Phil) B.Sc. M. Ed, Ph.D.
Former Principal, K.L.D.A.V.(P.G) College, Roorkee, India
Indian caste is ordinarily regarded as an institution sui generis, which must
be accepted as a potent social influence, but cannot be explained either by
parallel facts in other countries or by an enquiry into its own development,
since that is buried in the depths of pre-historic antiquity. Such an opinion is not
altogether well-founded for — whatever may be thought as to the similarity be-
tween the restrictions imposed by caste in India and by other artificial contri-
vances in Europe — it is certain that, though the broadly-marked separation of
the Brahman from the Tliakur dates from an extremely remote period, the formation of
subordinate castes is a process which continues in full operation to the
present day and admits of direct observation in all its stages. The course of
Indian tradition is, to all appearance, unbroken, and until some breach of con-
tinuity is clearly proved, the modern practice must be acknowledged as the
legitimate develojjment of the primary idea.
It is nothing strange that the Hindus themselves should fail to give any
reasonable explanation of the matter ; since not only are they restricted by
religious dogma, but every society is naturally as blind to the phenomena of its
own existence as the individual man is unconscious of his daily physical growth.
On the other hand, European outsiders, who might be expected to record simple
facts with the accuracy of impartial observers, are misled by the prejudices
which they have inherited from the early investigators of Oriental literature.
The Code of Manu was among the first, if not the very first, Sanskrit
didactic work of any importance made known to the world at large through
the medium of a translation. At that time it was unhesitatingly accepted as
the ultimate authority on all the subjects of which it treated, and hence the
four-fold division of Hindu society into Brahman, Kshatriya, Vaisya, and
Sudra was universally recognized as an absolute fact. The later discovery
of the Vedas, and the vast reach of antiquity which opened out upon their in-
terpretation, made the Manava Dharma Sastra appear a comparatively modern
production. Thus the explanations, which it gives of phenomena dating- back
in their origin to the remotest past, can only be regarded as theories, not as
positive verities ; while, again, the vast range of later Sanskrit literature which
has now become available to the student afl:brds a test of its accuracy in the
descriptions which it gives of contemporary society. Impartially judged by
either standard, the authority of the Code will be found materially shaken. Its
theories of origin are as devoid of Vedic confirmation as its pictures of existent
society are irreconcilable with the testimony of all independent literature,
whatever the age in which it was produced. If such a clearly defined four-
fold division ever existed, how happens it that one-half of the division remains
in full force to the present day while the other moietj^ has sunk into absolute
oblivion ? The Brahmanical order is still a living entity, and the Kshatriyais
adequately represented in modern speech by the word Thakur or Rajput,
while the Vaisya and Sudra have so completely disappeared — both in name and
fact— that an unlettered Hindu will neither understand the words when he
hears them nor recognize the classes implied when their meaning is explained
to him.
And not only is this the case in the present day, but it appears to have
been so all along. In the great epic ]booms, in the dramas, and the whole
range of miscellaneous literature, the sacerdotal and military classes are every-
where recognized, and mention of them crops up involuntary- in every familiar
narrative. But with the Vaisya and Siidra it is far different. These words
(I speak under correction) never occur as caste names, except with deliberate
reference to the Manava Code. They might be exjmnged both from the Ram-
yana and the Mahabharat without imparing the integrity of either composition.
Only a few moral discourses, which are unquestionably late Brahmanical
interpolations, and one entire episodically narrative, would have to be sacrificed :
the poem in all essentials would be left intact. But should we proceed in the
same way to strike out the Brahman and the Kshatriya, the whole framework
of the poem would immediately collapse. There is abundant mention of Dhi-
vars and Napitas, Sutradharas and Kumbhakaras, Mahajanas and Banijes,
but no comprehension of them all under two heads in the same familiar way
that all chieftains are Kshatriyas, and all priests and litterateurs Brahmans.
It is also noteworthy that Manu, in his 12th book, where he classifies gods
and men according to their quality (gnna), omits the Vaisya altogether ; and,
in the Adi Parvan of the Mahabharat (v. 3139) we read —
IBrahma-Ksliatradayas tasuiad Manor jatas tu maiiavah,
Tato ‘bhavad, Maharaja, Brahma Kshattreua sangatain
From which it is clear that the writer recognized a definite connection between
the Brahman and the Kshatriya, while all the rest of mankind were relegated to
the indeterminate. And, further, if the Vaisyas had ever formed one united body,
they would inevitably, at some period or another, have taken a more prominent
part in Indian politics than there is reason to suppose they ever did. Investi-
ture with the symbolic cord gave them social position, and the wealth which
their occupation enabled them to amass gave them power. Union apparently
was the only condition required to make them the predominant body in the State.
With the humbler pretensions and less internal cohesion than Manu assigns to
the Vaisyas, the free cities of Germany and the burghers of England
established their independence against an aristocracy and an ecclesiastical
system in comparison with which Kshatriyas and Brahmans were contemp-
tible.
The obvious, and indeed inevitable, inference from this popular ignorance,
literary silence, and historical insignificance appears to be that the two classes of Vaisya and Sudra never existed (except in Mann’s theory) as distinct bodies ;
and that the names are merely convenient abstractions to denote the middle
and lower orders of society, which have indeed distinctive class features
engendered by similarity of occupation, but no community of origin, and in
reality no closer blood connection between the component sub-divisions than
exists between any one of those sub-divisions and a Brahmanical or Kshatriya
family.
In the whole of the Rig Veda the word Vaisya occurs only once, viz., in
the 12th verse of the famous Purusha Si’ikta. Dr. Muir, Professor Max
Miiller, and in fact all Sanskrit scholars, with the solitary exception of Dr.
Hang, assign this hymn to a comparatively late period. It is the only one
which mentions the four different kinds of Vedic composition rich, sdi/ian,
chhanda, and yajush, a peculiarity noticed by Professor Aufrecht, and which
seems to be absolutely conclusive proof of late composition. And not only is
the hymn itself more recent than the body of the work, but the two verses
which alone refer to the four castes seem to be a still more modern interpolation.
In the first place, there is nothing the least archaic in their style, and they
might stand in any one of the Puranas without exciting a comment. That
this may be apparent they are quoted in the original : —
Brahmauo ‘sya mukhani asid, bahu Rajanyah kritah,
Uru tad asya yad Vaisyah, padbhyam Sudro ajayata.
Secondly, they are irreconcilable Avith the context ; for, while they des-
cribe the Brahman as the mouth of Purusha and the Sudra as born from his
feet, the very next lines speak of Indra and Agni as proceeding from his
mouth and the Earth from his feet.
We are, therefore, justified in saying that in the genuine Veda there was
no mention of caste whatever ; nor was it possible that there should be, on the
hypothesis now to be advanced, that the institution of caste was the simple
result of residence in a conquered country. This is confirmed by observino-
that in Kashmir, which was one of the original homes of the Aryan race, and
also for many ages secured by its position from foreign aggression, there is to
the present day no distinction of caste, but all Hindus are Brahmans. Thus,
too, the following remarkable lines from the Mahabharat, which distinctly
declare that in the beginning there was no caste division, but all men, as creat-
ed by God, were Brahmans : —
Na visesho ‘sti varnanam, Barvam Brahman idam jagat,
Brahmaua purva-srishtam hi karmabhir varuatam gatam.
At the time when the older Vedic hymns were written, the Aryan
had not yet descended upon the plains of Hindustan.
After the invasion, the conquerors naturally resigned all menial occupations to
the aborigines, whom they had vanquished and partially dispossessed, and cii-
joyed the fruits of victory while prosecuting the congenial pursuits of arms or
letters. For several years, or possibly generations, the invaders formed only a
small garrison in a hostile country, and constant warfare necessitated the for-
mation of a permanent military body, the ancestors of the modern Kshatriva.s
and Thakurs. The other part devoted themselves to the maintenance of
religious rites which they brought with them from their trans-Himalayanionic,
and the preservation of the sacred hymns and formula} used in the celebration
of public worship. Of this mystic and unwritten lore, once familiar to all, but
now, through the exigency of circumstances, retained in the memory of only a
few, these special families would soon become the sole depositaries. The gap between the two classes would gradually widen, till the full-blown Brahmins
was developed, conscious of his superior and exclusive knowledge,
The conquered aborigines were known by thename of Niigas or MIcchhas, or other
contemptuous term, and formed the nuclei’ of all the low castes, whom Manu
subsequently grouped together as Siubas,
esteeming them little, if at all, higher than the brute creation.
But a society, consisting only of priests, warriors, and slaves could not long
exist. Hence the gradual formation of a middle class, consisting of the off-
spring of mixed marriages, enterprizing natives and such unaspiring meninx of
the dominant race as found trade more profitable, or congenial to their tacks,
than either arms or letters. The character of this mixed population would ho
influenced in the first by the nature of the country in which they are
resident. In one district the soil would be better adapted for pasturage in
another for agriculture.
The Graziers would receive some name descriptive of their nomadic habits, as for example ‘ Ahir’ ; the word being derived from abhi, ‘ circnm,’ ir, ‘ ire,’ the ‘ ci.cumewites, or wanderrie’s. Similarly, other pastoral tribes such as the Gwalas,
the Ghosis, and the Gadarias, derive their distinctive names from go, ‘ a cow,’
ghosha, ‘a cattle station,’ and gadar, ‘a sheep.’ In an agricultural district the
corresponding class would also adopt some title indicative of their occupation,
as, for example, the Kisuus from krishi, ‘husbandary,’ the Bhuuhars from baiinj
‘ the ground and in Bengal the Chiisis from clids, ‘ploughing.’ Or (and the
same remark applies to every other class) they might retain the old
name of the district in which they were located, as the Kachhis from the coun-
try of Kachh. Again, so long as vast tracts of lands were still covered with
forest, the followers of the chase would be at least as numerous as the tillers of
the soil or the grazers of cattle. And, since the Aryan element in the middle
and lower strata of society was composed of those persons who, without any
penchant for learned study like the Brahmans, entertained a preference for se-
dentary pursuits rather than those of a more exciting nature such as the majo-
rity of their Thakur kinsmen affected, so the castes that followed the chasii,
not as an amusement, but as a means of livelihood, would naturally consist
exclusively of aborigines. And, as a matter of fact, it is found to be the
case, that all such castes have the dark complexion and the other physical
characteristics of the lower race. Such are the Badhaks and Aheriyas, who
derive their name — the one from the root badh, ‘ to kill,’ the other from the
Hindi aver, ‘ game’ — so, too, the Dhanuks and the Lodhas, whose names are
contracted forms of Dhaaushka, ‘ a bowman,’ and Lubdhaka, ‘a huntsman.’
These two tribes have now abandoned their hereditary avocations, — the Dha-
aaushaks being ordinarily village watchman, and the Lodhas agriculturists — though in
Oudh the latter were, till quite recently, still connected with the forest rather than the
fields; being the wood-cutters, whose business it was to fell tiaiber and transport it by the
Grhjghra river to Bahram Ghat and other marts.
In this way the majority of the servile, or so-called Sudra, castes ca no
into existence, in order to supply the unproductive classes with food ; and sub
sequently, when population grew and towns were built, their number was vastly increased by the new trades to satisfy the more complex re-
quirements of urban life. Then, too, last of all, and by no means simultaneously
with the other three, as represented in the legends, the Vaisya order was pro-
duced. For the purpose of facilitating barter and exchange, traders established
themselves eitlier on the sea-coast or at places convenient of access for the in-
habitants of two dissimilar tracts of country, and forming a confederation
among themselves would take a collective name, either from the locality which
they occupied, as Ajudhyavasis, Mathuriyas, or Agarwalas, or simply from
the special branch of trade which they pursued, as Sonars, Lohiyas, or Bani-
yas. From the facility of acquiring wealth and the civilizing influence of
social contact these merchants would soon form a striking contrast to the sim-
ple rural population who brought their produce for barter, and would receive
some vulgar title indicative of the difference ; hence the name of Mahajans, ‘ the great people.’ And all such names, having once firmly attached themselves,
would be retained even when they ceased to be strictly applicable, in consequence of migration from the original seat or change in profession or circumstances.
Upon this theory we come to a clear understanding of the popular feeling
about caste — a feeling which unmistakably exists in the native mind, though
opposed to dogmatic teaching — that below the Brahman and the Thakur there
are a number of miscellaneous divisions, but no two well-defined collective
groups. There is a vague impression that the Vaisya is properly a tradesman
and the Sudra a servant; while it is definitely ruled that the former is the
much more reselectable appellation of the two. Thus, a difficulty arises with
regard to a family that is distinctly neither of Brahman nor Thakur descent,
and from time immemorial has been engaged in some specially ignoble trade or
exceptionally honorable service. The latter aspires to be included in the
higher order, in spite of his servitude ; while the former, though a trader, is
popularly ranked in the same grade as people who, if they are to be known by
any class name at all, are clearly Sudras. This never occurs in precisely the
same way with the two higher Manava caste?, though one or two facts may be
quoted which at first sight seem to tell against such an assertion. For exam-
ple, there are a numerous body of carpenters called Ojhas (the Avord being a
corruption of Upadhya’, who are admitted to be of Brahmanical descent and
are invested with the sacred cord. But common interests forming a stronger
bond of union than common origin, they are regarded rather as a siècles of
the genus Barhai than of the genus Brahman ; their claim, however, to the latter
title never being disputed if they choose to assert it. Similarly, as the trade
of the usurer is highly incompatible with priestly pretensions, the Brahmans which practise it are gradually being recognized as quite distinct castes under the name of ‘ Bohras and Athwarayars.’ There are also some pseudo-Brdhmiin and pseudo-Thakur tribes who rank very low in the social scale ; but even their case
is by no means a parallel one, for it is admitted on all sides that the original
ancestor of — for example —the Bhats and Ahivasis was a Brahman, and of the
Gauruas a Thakur. The doubt is, whether the descendants, in consequence of
the bar-sinister on their blazon, have altogether lost their ancestral title or only
tarnished its dignity ; whereas with a Sonar who claims to be a Vaisya, it is
not any suspicion of illegitimate descent, nor any incompatibility of employ-
ment, that raises a doubt ; but rather the radical incompleteness of the original
theory and the absence of any standard by which his pretensions may be
tested.
In short, excepting only the Brahman and the Thakur, all other Indian
castes correspond, not to the Scottish clans — with which they are often com-
pared, and from which they are utterly dissimilar— but to the close guilds
which in medieval times had so great an influence on European society. As
the Goldsmiths formed themselves into a company for mutual protection, so the
Sonars combined to make a caste ; — the former admitted many provincial
guilds with special customs and regulations, the latter recognized many subor-
dinate gotras ; the farmer required a long term of apprenticeship, amounting
virtually to adoption, the latter made the profession hereditary ; the former
required an oath of secrecy, the latter insured secrecy by restricting social in-
tercourse with outsiders. As the founders of the company had no mutual con-
nection beyond community of interest, so neither had the founders of the caste.
When we say that all architects are sons of S. Barbara, or all shoemakers of S.
Crispin, these being their patron saints, the expression is quite intelligible.
What more is implied in saying that all Sanadhs are sons of Sanat-Kumara
To attach any literal meaning to a tradition which represents a Brahmanical
caste as born of the Gayatri (a Vedic metre) is a precisely similar absurdity
to saying a company was born of the Pater-Noster and Ave Maria, because
on certain days every member was bound to repeat his rosary. A history
of caste, in the sense in which the phrase is generally understood, viz., the
tracing each caste to one definite pair of ancestors, is, from the circumstances
of the case, an impossibility.
With Brahmans and Kshatrias matters stand somewhat differently.
Though so far as any one subordinate division is concerned, it may often
happen that its individual members never at any time formed one family, yet
as all the sub- divisions are in the main descendants of the early Aryan con-
querors, to that limited extent they have a genuine community of origin. So
long as the line of demarcation which separated them from the aboriginal inha-
bitants of India remained clearly defined, while the only distinction among
themselves lay in the difference of occupation, the conversion of a Kshatriya
into a Biahman would not be a more unusual occurrence than the retirement of
a Christian knight, when wearied with warfare, into the peaceful seclusion of
the cloister. The most famous example of such a transformation is that sup-
plied by the legend of Visvamitra, which must ever prove an insuperable diffi-
culty to the orthodox Hindu who accepts the Manava doctrine of an essential
and eternal difference between the two castes. At the present day, when Brah-
manism has become an inseparable hereditary quality, the priestly character
has been transferred to the religious mendicants and ascetics who, allowing
for the changed circumstances of time and place, correspond to the Brahmans
of antiquity, and like them freely admit associates from every rank and condi-
tion of Hindu society. The apparent difference is mainly due to the fact that
in primitive times the Aryan outsiders were all of one status, while now they
are infinite in variety.
Theoretically, the essence of the Kshatriya is as incapable of transfer or
acquisition except by natural descent as that of the Brahman, but the practice
of the two classes has always been very different. The strength of a commu-
nity that lays claim to any esoteric knowledge lies in its exclusiveness ; but a
military body thrives by extension, and to secure its own efficiency must be
lax in restrictions. It may be observed as a singular fact that all the very
lowest castes in the country, if interrogated as to their origin, will say that
they are in some way or another Thakur : and this is illustrated by a passage
in Manu, where he mentions several outcast tribes as Kshatriyas by descent.
Whence we may infer that at all times there has been a great freedom of in-
tercourse between that class and others. Indeed, if we are to accept the legend
of Parasurara as in any sense expressing an historical event, the whole Thakur
race has been repeatedly extirpated and as often re-formed out of alien elements. nor is
this at variance with modern usage, for no Hindu rises to the rank of
Rdja, whatever his original descent, without acquiring a kind of Thakur cha-
racter, which in most instances is unhesitatingly claimed by and conceded to
his descendants in the third or fourth generation, after alliances with older
families have given some colour to the pretension. And the illegitimate sons
of Thakurs, who by the Code of Manu would be Ugras — their mothers being
Musalmanis or low-caste Hindu women — are, as is notorious, generally accept-
ed, either themselves or in the person of their immediate descendants, as gen-
uine Thakurs. Again, many of the higher Thakur class acknowledge the im-
purity of their birth in the popular tradition of their origin. Thus the Chan-
dels (i. e., the moon-born) profess to be derived from the daughter of a Bandras
Brahman, who had an intrigue with the moon-god ; and the Gahlots (the cave-
born) from a Rani of Mewar, who took refuge with some mountaineers on the
Malya range.
From all this it follows that, whatever the dignity and antiquity of some
particular Thakur families, the Thakur caste is a heterogeneous body ; which,
like the miscellaneous communities of lower pretensions which we have already
discussed, is held together more by similarity of circumstances than unity of
origin. The same principle of caste-formation is still actively at work through
all grades of Indian society. The comparatively modern organization of many
so-called castes is attested by the Persian names which they have thought pro-
per to assume, — -for example, the Darzis, the Mallahs, the Mimars, &c. A
large proportion of the first-named are really Kayaths, which shows that the
term ‘ Darzi’ is still in a transitional state, and has not yet thoroughly shaken
off its original trade meaning. The older word for a tailor is stiji, which, like
so much of the Hindi vocabulary, having become unfashionable, now implies a
workman of an inferior description. Similarly, randi ‘ a woman,’ has become
a term of reproach for ‘ a woman of bad character ;’ and nagara, Hindi for ‘ a
city,’ is at the present day used to denote, not even a village, but only a mere
hamlet.’ The desire to dignify a mean calling by a high-sounding name — as
when a sweeper is called military ‘ a prince,’ and a cook maharaj, — has been often cited as
an Oriental idiosyncrasy, which to the mind of a European is product-
ive of ridicule rather than respect. It gives occasion, however, to many a new
caste-name. Thus, the khdhrob of the town regards himself under that Persian
designation as the superior of the village hhangi : and the Mimar, or Shoragar,
or Chuna-paz, or Kori, or even Mochi, in assuming the name descriptive of
his calling, almost forgets that he belongs to the universally-despised caste of
the Chainar.
To judge from the Census Returns, it would seem that these partially-
developed castes are only recognized in some few districts, and totally ignored
in others. Thus, Mathura is a great centre of the stone-cutter’s art ; but the
men who pi-actise it belong to different ranks, and have not adopted the distinct-
ive trade-name of sang-tardsh, which seems to be recognized in Aligarh, Ha-
mirpur, and Kumaon. Again, in every market town there are a number of
weighmen, who, no doubt, in each place have special guild regulations of their
own ; but only in Banaras do they appear as a distinct caste, with the name of
palle-ddrs. So too at Saharanpur some fruit-sellers— whose trade it may be
presumed has been encouraged by the large public garden at that station — have
separated themselves from the common herd of Kimjrds, or ‘ costermongers,’
and decorated their small community with the Persian title of Mewafarosh.
As might be expected, this distintegration of society and adoption of a novel
nomenclature prevails most extensively among the lower orders, where the
associations connected with the old name that is discarded are of an unpleasant
nature. But even in the higher classes, where the generic title is one of hon-
our, it is frequently superseded in common parlance by one that is more dis-
tinctive, though it may be of less favourable import. Thus, among Brahmans
a Bohra sub-caste is in course of formation, and a Chaube of the Mathura
branch when settled elsewhere is invariably styled, neither Brahman nor
Chaube, but Mathuriya. Illustrations might be multiplied indefinitely ; but
the few now cited are sufficient to prove how caste-sub -divisions are formed
in the present day , and to suggest how they originated in the first instance.
REFERANCE-
