Q:Write an essay on caste as a form of stratification?

Answer: FG Bailey distinguished four separate referents of caste on India. Caste which
have four varna in India in order of Brahmans, kshatriyas, Vaisyas and Sudras. They are not
exhaustive as some of the population do not fall within four categories like Muslim or tribal or
untouchables of Hinduism. The Varna system is sociologically relevant as a framework of
reference for actual systems of stratification. They can serve as a prestige indicator in
making claims to higher status or as a metaphor of actual relations. Caste categories are
aggregates of persons usually in same linguistic region and also with same traditional
occupation and sometimes with same caste name. These are not social strata since they are
not groups with similar atributes. These are not a reference framework developed by Hindu
scholars. Bailey also talked about the caste association which are groups, exclusive but not
exhaustive which have developed roughly since the turn of the century. They function as welfare
and improvement association, and as political interest groups notoriously in Kerala. Caste as jati
is the main sociological referent of the word this society was divided into countless small
political units which cal blocks because they could be arranged and rearranged to make larger
units. Both these facts are aspects of the caste system and each block itself constituted a caste
system. The population of each block was divided vertically into villages or larger territorial sub
division and horizontally into castes. In the fourth sense, the caste system meets all the criteria
suggested by Nadel for the recognition of social stratification.
Bailey talked about the activities characteristic of the caste system which are of three kinds.
There are those activities which segregates caste from one another and define as distinct
groups. On the wider scene each caste has a set of differential atributes. It has a distinct
name, beliefs about its origin and also it probably will show diacritical elements in rituals
particularly in life crisis from another
In the field of interaction there is a complete break between one caste and another in kinship.
All marriage are endogamous and no kinship links can be established across caste boundaries.
In addition to specific links of actual kinship and to the recognition of potential links, one should
for it is this which underlies recruitment to caste
mention general sentiment of kinship
a
association and which underwrites the quasi group characteristics of caste categories.
The first category of activities are those concerned with segregation and definition, the
second concem interdependence and the third concem hierarchy. The interdependence of
rests well
caste on two related and known principles. The first is a division of labour. Both on
activities, there are tasks ,socially defined as necessities which can be
profane and ritual
by
performed only one caste.
Conversely each group has a limited range of potential activities.
Secondly caste form a system because each caste has differential access to political power.
The third aspect of caste activities is hierarchy .This is entailed by differential access to
poltical power. Bailey classified caste actiities under the heading of segregation
interdependence and hierarchy. These are not exclusive but can be different aspects of the
same activity.
There are three definition. Firstly which seizes
upon the precise ascription of social status
and it's immutability which may be called the
rigidity type of definition, second the definition of
caste for which the criterion is the association of the caste
system with a uniquely Indian set of
religious beliefs and third some definition which find the distinctive criteria in structural
arrangements, notably those of Barth and Leach.
Definitions of this kind are simple and straightforward structural statements
linking caste with
other forms of social stratification, and differentiating it from them by the degree of social
mobility permitted. These definitions refer to two facts: () that rank is ascribed at birth, and (i)
that a change of rank (social mobility) is dificult or
impossible. One may therefore ask (a)
whether these characteristics are in fact found in the Indian caste system, and,
secondly (b)
whether 'rigidity' is a sufficient and useful criterion for the definition of caste system.
(a)Ascription of rank by birth into an Indian caste means that one must be born of
parents
both of whom belong to the same caste, and that there is no other way of becoming a member
of a caste. There are various forms of marrying across caste, both institutionalised and
irregular,
and, at first sight, these might suggest that the caste system is not so closed or so rigid as the
definition suggests. Of the institutionalised
exceptions to the rule of endogamy the commonest
is hypergamy (man high, woman low). But in general, where such marriages are across castes
and not merely between ranked descent groups within a caste ( also called hypergamy), an
unambiguous rule of descent allots children either to the mother's group, e.g. Nayer or the
father's groups, e.g. Swat or to a third caste, e.g. Nepal.
Caste membership is not only ascribed at birth: it is also immutable. No individual can join a
caste other than his natal one. In so far institutionalised
as mobility exists, t pertains to groups,
not individuals. Instances which come to mind are women in hypergamous marriages; voluntary
Outcastes, and those who successfuly cheat the system. To what extent women in
hypergamous marriages join higher castes is an empirical question, on which there is
insuficient evidence to attempt a generalization. In the second and third cases the outcast and
the Sannyasi these are not so much mobility through the caste system , but a step out of the
system altogether.

Leach argued that castes are not status-groups but are a functional entity with a special
distinguishing set of cultural characteristics. The rigidity characteristic can, however, be
criticised on the grounds that it is not so much an ultimate criterion, but rather a suggestion
inviting further analysis. This analysis can proceed in two ways: a) either one can say that
status ascription at birth and status immutability is underwritten by a set of belief about pollution
or b) one can say that status ascription at birth and status immutability are entailed by other
structural characteristics, whether these are analytic (i.e. entailed in the strict sense, meaning
included in the definition of birth-ascription and status immutability) or they are synthetic (i.e.
empiricaly the case- for example that caste is always associated with a particular kind of
economy or never found in societies above a certain population level. It should be notes again
that one does not have to choose between these definitions, in the sense that if one is right the
other is wrong: a) concerns culture, b) concerns strict. To follow one rather than the other
reflects one's interests or one's training: nothing more. To set them up as alter active makes for
disputation but not for understanding.
The argument here is that a caste system is
distinguished from other sorts of social
stratification because it is connected with particular religious beliefs.
This view is held by Dumont and Peacock.
1) In the caste system we have to do pre-eminently with religious ideas connected with
Durity.
2) In order to understand the distribution of occupations in India we have to go to beliefs of
a religious nature
3) It is above all religious ideas rather than economic values which establish the rank of
2ach group.

In order t access these statements, one must first decide whether the authors intended them to
be analytic or synthetic. they are analytic, then the predicate is contained within the subject. If
If
they are synthetic then subject and predicate are separate elements, hypothetically connected
into a system.
3.The absence of competition between castes is connected with the direct political and
economic relationships. The dominant caste has an autonomous political existence, not as
corporate politics group, but as field for political competition. Certain no subordinate caste is a
corporate political group. Caste is an organizing principle within such groups. It is a fom of
cooperation, one might say, of administration but it is not a principle of competition.
4.Barth says that one form of caste is summation of roles. He
points out that in a caste system
there are several status frameworks- economic, political,
religious: that any person holds roles
in all three of these and it also becomes a single role.
The summation of roles has a clear
empirical connection with the co-operative element.
In so far recruitment is by birth only and there is no second
refining recruitment criterion,
it is
impossible to conceive that individuals in the groups should differ from one another: they must
all have the same position in different status frameworks. Therefore birth
not itself entail summation of roles, and the two must be
ascription of status do
considered different. Therefore, as
structural features defining caste, to birth-ascription and cooperation we must add the
summation of roles. Caste systems are always involute
system.
5.To say that a system is involute is to
say that there is no specialization of command. Involute
systems are only found in simple societies, or in relatively insulated enclaves of
sOcieties.
complex
6.Defining criteria for a system of social stratification: it must be divided into groups which are
exclusive, which are exhaustive, which are ranked.
To define caste need the following criteria: groups which are closed, relations
we
between which
are organised by summation of roles and which co-operate and do not
compete.
All this are found in small-scale societies. Therefore, small scale
societies are not part of the
definition of caste system but are a condition of the existence of
caste-systems.
In place of countless small relative isolated traditional
political division they are now in a few
large or political Arena which in this context we can take as a state of the Indian Union state
various that is which formerly well separated by
being in different political system are noOW
uniting categories are now becoming groups. Barriers of endogamy breakdown, and that at the
same time the ritual attributes which indicate inferior rank are being discarded. All cast is not

and Aspire to the same different standard and insofar as they succeed ritual uses to have a
to
diacritical significance.

Caste associations have three fields of activity. (a) they are concerned with ritual
N.K. Bose has suggested that when person of humble castes achieved
respectability.
professional status as a lawyer or a government servant, they found themselves in difficulties
with colleagues, most of whom belong to higher castes. They thereupon set about organising
fellows associations, which would reform caste behaviour and bring it into line
their cash into
with high caste standards. Relation between castes should not be what they were in traditional
India. (b) The association are also these and education and finding jobs for their members.(c)
Such activity involves competition with other castes, so that associations become invohved in
politics. Example are the Nayar Service Society and Irava.

Groups of castes that operates within a caste system:

(a)at vilage level and (b) at State level
Of the structural criteria mentioned those of exclusiveness, exhaustiveness and closed
recruitment still hold unambiguously in the village. The remaining criteria do not.
(1)There is a notion of ranking system and it is accepted that there should be. But there are still
some jati that refuse to
acknowledge the inferior rank.
(2)Nowadays people have economic and political relationships beyond boundaries.

In other words there is no longer a submission of ritual

political and economic roles of
dominance. Though social stratification is still present in the village; there is still a
system of
closed recruitment: but the system is now tending to be not
organic, but segmentary.
Recruitment through descriptive criteria survives and so does a sense of moral obligation
towards one's caste fellows, now more widely denied. Caste
associations are not strata in the
strict sense, since by no means everyone belongs to such an association. By activities the
Nayar Service Society is to be reckoned a competing interest-group, to be categorized with
political parties sooner than the status group. lastly, while we may call the new caste
associations 'castes' ina loose way, they are certainly not operating in the caste
system.