35 Origin and concept of caste: Various theories

Dr. Subhendu K Acharya

Content:

1.      Introduction

2.      Characteristics of caste

3.      Theories of caste system

4.      Changes in Caste System in India

INTRODUCTION

Various factors define the social stratification called caste which further defines the social hierarchy of its individuals. This stratification mainly based on power, prestige etc. Caste structure is formed on The basis of the birth of the individual. In the caste ideology the Brahminic model of Hindu Society faces a problem of ‘life and death’ derived from the Indian thinking in terms of ‘purity and pollution’. The purity of life is the absolute truth free from this world and beyond death in a state of mukti (salvation), whereas impurity is related to death, human waste, dirt etc. in such thinking it is easy to understand why most of the Hindus are against no-vegetarianism and the use of alcohol. Abstaining keeps them away from any possible contact with death and impurity. This is the character of the caste theory, whereas in practice, although ‘pure’ and impure’ are separated in order to protect life from death, special caste specialists and groups are in fact formed, who charge themselves with impurity to free others from pollution. It creates the hierarchical classification of the four main ‘verna’ and a number of jatis or castes which are based on series of gradations of ritual and religious purity, high and low status, and eating and drinking habits.

The root of English meaning of Jati or Caste comes from the word ‘Casta’ which in Portuguese means breed, race or kind. Hindu system calls it Jati. The functional role of caste as a unit explains the status of equal individuals; caste also acts as a system which maintains the characters of the very caste and its members.

Caste has been perceived as a cultural concept which is based on certain ideas, beliefs and values. Similarly caste from a structural point of view acts to maintain the status and roles of the involved population.

Different social scientists have defined caste in various definition.

According to Herbert Risley caste is as “a collection of families bears a common name, claiming a common descent from a mythical ancestor, human or divine, professing to follow the same hereditary calling and is regarded by those who are competent to give an opinion as forming a single homogeneous community.”

Ketkar defines caste as “a social group having two characteristics – (i) membership is confined to those who are born of members and includes all persons so born; (ii) the members are forbidden by an inexorable social law to marry outside the caste”.

M.N. Srinivas, said, “Caste is a hereditary, endogamous, usually localised group, having a traditional association with an occupation and a particular position in the local hierarchy of castes. Relations between castes are governed, among other things, by the concepts of pollution and purity and generally, maximum commensality occurs within the caste”.

According to Andre Beteille, “Caste may be defined as a small and named group of persons characterised by endogamy, hereditary membership and a specific style which sometimes includes the pursuit, by tradition, of a particular occupation and is usually associated with a more or less distinct ritual status in a hierarchical system based on the concepts of purity and pollution.”

So it can be said that caste is a mechanism that is involved in stratifying society, and formulation of social groups.

The important characteristics of Caste are as follows:

1. Segmentary Society:

It explains that small social groups called caste formulates the society. Further each of the social group (castes) is socially well developed. The most important is the birth of an individual defines his or her affiliation to a caste. That means the caste of the parents becomes the caste of the child. Such form of affiliation is unalterable which defines the position of an individual in the society for his whole life. Though the individual gets better in terms of various factors like, education, occupation etc, it does not elevate his caste status leading to no possibility to social mobility.

But M. N. Srinivas, in his findings shows that an individual elevates himself in hierarchy in a couple of generation after getting well education or economic prosperity.

2. Hierarchy:

The Indian caste system is a good explanation to social; hierarchy.

Social superiority and inferiority are defined as per Caste status. While Brahmins occupy the top hierarchical position, Sudras are at the lower. Kshatriyas being in the second position in hierarchy followed by Vaisyas formulate the total caste system in India. Though there are untouchables in the society they do not formulate the Caste system. Most importantly, though the position and hierarchy is clearly defined the happenings of social tension are not common. In this process religion and such practices play a pivotal role.

3. Endogamy:

Endogamy is the most fundamental character of the caste system that directs a member of a particular caste to marry within his or he own caste or sub caste. The violation brings social ostracism or loss of membership. But on the other hand, in certain cases hypergamy or hypogamy is accepted with riders.

4. Hereditary Status:

Caste hierarchy is affiliated to the membership of the individual to the caste and the membership is defined by birth of the individual. So caste is a business of those who are born in their respective caste groups.

5. Hereditary Occupation:

The caste system is conceived on the basis of occupation. Affiliated persons to a particular caste practise an occupation which is already prescribed for that caste group. For example, Kshatriyas are meant for rule and administration as well as protection of the society against outside attack. Similarly Brahmins act as priests, barber, washer man do provides services.

6. Restriction on Food and Drink:

Having or sharing food is an important character of caste structure and hierarchy. It is the caste hierarchy that defines whom an individual belonging from a particular caste will dine or drink with. For example Brahmins do not take any cooked food from Sudras as it leads to pollution. At the same time a higher caste can contextually have food or drink from Kshatriyas.

7. Cultural Difference:

The caste hierarchy has defined the cultural practices among different castes by further defining, their occupation, pattern of marriage, sanctity and holiness etc.; to be true to own religious status and practices of own caste. So the living practices of different castes are different. As Prof. GS Ghurye says, ‘caste is a small and complete world for the individual with differentiating from others’.

8. Social Segregation:

Defining differentiating aspects in caste with respect to Social segregation, Ghurye says-

“Segregation of individual castes or of groups of castes in village is most obvious mark of civil privileges and disabilities, and it has prevailed in a more or less definite form all over India”.

It has been observed that the social segregation is more severe in southern India than northern India. In traditional village societal system, it can be observed that the service castes as well as untouchables are socially segregated and are isolated from higher caste groups and are let to settle at the outskirts in rear end of the village.

9. The Concept of Pollution:

Pollution is a highly contagious issue and plays an significant role in maintaining the caste distances. It carries a lot of stigma with respect to the person belonging from lower caste. Even the shadow of the service caste is a matter of avoidance for the upper caste.

10. A Particular Name:

Caste and sub caste names are very specific and those names are the identity of the individual belonging from the caste. Similarly, the name of the caste is also based on his or her occupation which explains what particular job the person practises.

11. Jati Panchayat:

The status and role of Caste conventions or Jati Panchayats is very important in preserving, revealing and protecting the laws. Though this varies in various name in various parts like Kuldriya and Jokhila in MP and Rajasthan respectively, their functions are almost similar i.e. maintaining the Caste system.

12. Taboo:

Practising Taboo is a social mechanism and prohibition that maintains the issues like good and bad in the society. Though it is the biggest source of superstition,, it mainly aims to isolate the caste from rest as per the restriction or prohibition, for example, to share space with Sudras or Untouchables.

Theories behind caste system:

There are many theories behind the formation of the caste system. But the exact and original one is is unknown to everyone. Whatever it may be it can be said that the caste system began in India. The origin of caste system is often understood of starting after the Aryan invasion or after the establishment of indo Aryan societal system.

Racial Theory:

Anthropologist Dr. D.N. Mazumdar gave the racial theory of caste in India. As per him caste system started in India after the Aryans entered.

As Mazumdar says the concept of Verna or colour came to use by these people. The other practice that came to practice is the ‘Dasa Varna’. The difference between Aryans and Dasas has been highly strongly discussed in Rig Veda. This literature has discussed various racial features between Aryans and non Aryans like, colour, features, practices, speeches. It is further said that mentions have been made many time regarding Brahmin, Kshatriya and Vis in rig Vedic literature. The reference to Sudra is just once in it.

In the hierarchy, Brahman and Kshatriya occupy the first two position. Similarly, in social hierarchy these two groups were identified as priests-with knowledge, Rulers- the warriors. The other caste Vis or Vaisya referred to common people while Sudras are the service providers. Though Rig Veda has little mention about the caste hierarchy, but it is believed that Brahmins were conferred the top position in the society.

Political Theory:

The political theory of caste is more convinced that Brahmans are the formulators of this whole caste system and further moulding it as per their needs. They placed themselves at the top of the hierarchy. Prof. GS Ghurye said, “Caste is a Brahminic child of Indo-Aryan culture cradled in the land of the Ganges and thence transferred to other parts of India”.

This political theory says the caste hybridisation or the coming up of Caste Sankaras is illegitimate and out groups in caste system. According to this theory, the Brahmans are identified as Dwijas. Along with Brahmans Kshatriya and Sudras were also identified as Dwijas or twice burn castes. It was defined that these three castes had went through the process of rebirth while the Sudras are considered once born. Here it is worth mentioning that the term jati henceforth started to define substructure in Varna system though the word is simultaneously used for Varna.

Another most important aspect is increase in supremacy of Brahmans in society. The acts and social roles of other three castes were set by Brahmans. The concept that Brahmans born from the great words of the god, with Kshatriyas from His arms and Vaisyas from His thighs and Sudras from the feet was conceived.

The high influence of Brahminical tradition started to develop complicated practices with respect to religion and worship in order to maintain higher hold on the society. Caste rigidity started to be realised. Strict rules were incorporated in religious practices and social divisions. Distinctive division between purity and impurity started to come up.

Occupational Theory:

The occupational theory defines caste in the line of social or societal function further leading to various occupational groups being defined as caste or sub castes like, blacksmith, goldsmith, barber, washer man etc. That means this theory defines the individual’s position and status in society based on his or her work pattern as placed in societal hierarchy of superiority and inferiority. Newsfield in his observation on caste said, “Function and function alone is responsible for the origin of caste structure in India”.

Traditional Theory:

The traditional theory of caste system brings in the divine origin of caste system. It refers to the formulation of caste system by the divine creator , Brahma in his process of creation of world and a human society. Dr. DN Mazumdar says, “if, however we take the divine origin of the Varna as an allegorical explanation of the functional division of society, the theory assumes practical significance”.

Further Denzil Ibetson defines caste as the customized forms of guilds. He opines that while tribes, guilds and religion interacted with each other Caste came to the form. By adopting specific professions in a fixed format, the tribes were transformed to guilds. Taking the queue from the priests, the tertiary position in the society the other guilds started to practise similar practices like endogamy with giving rise to a caste in a period of time.

Religious Theory:

The religious theory of caste is mainly advocated by Hocart and Senart. Hocart defined social stratification as a result of religious principles and customs. He generalised that the predominant role of religious prist and the kings with a godly figure played a pivotal role in formation of various functional organelles in the society. Senart, taking the clue from religious prohibition, said the caste system originated with particular local god who accepts a particular food as offerings. Believers of different deities are parts of different groups.

Evolutionary Theory:

Evolutionally theory with the assumption of social evolution as the very process explains the caste system is an outcome of long process of social evolutionary process rather than any other way.

This theory defines following factors as few influential ones in caste formulation process:

(i)   Common occupations running through generations

(ii)   The Brahminical desire for puritanism

(iii)   Absence of strict state control

(iv)   The liberal ruller giving space for various customs to prevail than common code

(v)   The concept of Karma as the driving practice with strong faith in reincarnation

(vi)   Ancestor worship, Ideas of exclusive family and the sacramental meal

(vii)    Growing confrontational practices and intolerance between the patriarchal and the matriarchal systems

(viii)   Confrontation of various racial groups, increased social prejudices

(ix)   Heavily customed social policies without stability

(x)   Communication barrier

(xi)   Largely stagnant social system

(xii)   Attack by intruders.

(xiii)   Lack of modernisation in structure of the society

Theory of Sanskritization

The theory of sanskritization was given by MN Srinibas. As Srinibas defines sanskritization as a process by which a ‘low’ Hindu caste or other tribal group changes its customs, ritual, ideology and way of life in the direction of a high and frequently, ‘twice born’ caste. Generally such changes are followed by a claim to a higher position in the caste hierarchy than that traditionally conceded to claimant caste by the local community. The claim is usually made over a period of time, in fact, a generation or two, before the ‘arrival’ is conceded. Occasionally a caste claims a position which its neighbours are not willing to concede. This type of agreement between claimed and conceded status may be not only in the realm of opinion but also in the more important realm of institutionalised practice. Thus Harijan castes in Mysore do not accept cooked food and drinking water from the Smiths who are certainly one of the touchable caste and therefore superior to Harijans.

Theory of Dominant caste

Understanding dominant caste is crucial to the understanding of rural social life in India. A caste may be said to be ‘dominant’ when it preponderates numerically over other castes, and when it also wields preponderant economic and political power. A large and powerful caste group can be more easily dominant if its position in the local community is not too low. Occasionally a caste is dominant in a group of neighbouring villages if not over a district or two, and in such cases, local dominance is linked with regional dominance.

When a caste enjoys one form of dominance, it is frequently able to acquire other forms as well in course of time. Thus a caste which numerically strong and wealthy will be able to move up in the ritual hierarchy if it sanscritizes its ritual and way of life and also loudly and persistently proclaims itself to be what it wanted to be.

It is further not worthy that the Indian caste system is a social institution in itself than simply being a Hindu practice. Most importantly, cast system is not a simple Indian concept it is also practised in other parts of the world. The feudal medieval Europe also functioned like a caste based system.

Theory of fission and fusion

These two theories are the latest and land mark theories in the process of explaining caste system.  The first theory i.e. theory of fission was proposed by Iravati Karve that most castes are tribe in origin. Like a tribe, a caste is an extended kin group traditionally spread over a definite geographical region. And, as in a tribe, members of a caste which used to be or still is regulated by a caste which used to be or still is regulated by a caste council. Karve’s idea of caste system is that caste system is not an outcome of Aryan tradition rather it was there in pre Aryan time.  As Karve defined the caste as a caste cluster rather than caste like Brahmins is a caste cluster along with sub castes as the castes. She further explained that castes in the caste clusters could successfully elevated themselves to the same social rank through time and continued to maintain their endogamous character. So she said these groups in a caste cluster can be culturally different significantly along with without any genetically diffident.

With the changes in the social economic arena, there has been a substantial change in the caste system in different parts of India.

Conceptually the Change pattern in the caste system can be identified as structural, functional band attitudinal.

Structural Changes in caste system:

(i) Declining Brahminical supremacy in society

New socio economic structure has brought a significant change to the position of Brahmins and their tertiary positioning in the society. The economic prosperity has brought significant liberty and confidence other caste groups including untouchables to grow and come forward. This process has put Brahmins to an equal substratum along with the other caste from a higher position they once enjoyed.

(ii) Changes in the Caste hierarchy:

Though Caste still plays a significant role in Indian social system, there has been a phenomenal change in the practice front of Caste hierarchy. It is no longer maintained in the strict form as it was there previously. Various factors like urbanisation, expansion of occupation, advancement in agricultural technology etc has narrowed down the gap between various castes. Further the caste system has given rise to class system in urban set ups.

(iii) Empowerment of untouchables:

Various policies have been brought up by Government of India to protect the rights of these underprivileged groups of the society. Further rights based organisations have been working for the providing social justice to them. Various promotional practices and welfare programs by has also brought socio economic development. So, all such practices have led to the status upliftment of these groups.

Changes in Caste system: Functional:

(i) New practices in status fixation:

The basic condition of social status in caste system is defined by birth. The change in social system like education, economy like factors has redefined the regulation of status fixation.

(ii) Change with regard to occupation:

In previous social condition, the individual was bound to follow the caste occupation, no matter he or she bring any luck to his life. In recent time, caste is no more the condition to pursue an occupation. Persons from different caste are free to get involved in a occupational practice as per the wish.

(iii) Changes in marriage restrictions:

Changes on the front of marriage are a defining condition for changing caste system. The strict rules of endogamy have got diluted. The members of higher caste are getting married lo members of groups who are once perceived as outcaste or untouchables. Marital taboos are being broken by changing socio-educational upliftment.

(iv) Change in commensality:

The rules regarding commensality in traditional system were too rigid. The practices like avoidance to eat or drink with lower cast is no longer a sincere practice even among Brahmins.

(v) Changing practices regarding pollution and purity:

Perceptions regarding purity have shifted from religious, sate base practices to public and personal hygiene. Similarly, taboos regarding food like no vegetarian are no longer such strictly followed.

(vi) Change in the life style:

Economic, educational and social changes have brought substantial change in life style of individual irrespective caste barrier. Previously, the caste base life style which was the caste identity has been diluted.

(vii) Shifting relationship pattern at inter caste level:

The inter caste relationship between various castes which was rigid has become flexible in past decades. The upper caste dominance has decreased due to increased socio economic equality on the economic, education, rights and justice like fronts. . The uplift of lower and socially marginalised groups has increased their confidence to stand at equal space with other majorities. Broadly, it has helped to change the caste equation and inter-caste relation. Further such changes are tending to bring the vertical relation between upper caste and lower caste to horizontal level.

(viii) Weakened power of caste Panchayats:

The previous dominance of upper caste panchayat has lost its ground with growth of public legal system. Similarly the entry of marginalised group into judiciary system has brought more power to such groups.

(ix) Removal of educational barriers:

The previous restriction of education only to Brahmins and upper caste has broken. Education has become a right for all which has help caste groups in lower position to get educated and liberated from age old socio cultural vagaries.

(x) Social empowerment and changing power system:

The change in power structure from up to down has broken down in recent period. With all round social and cultural growth, various groups are getting empowered who were once marginalised.

(xi) Increasing efforts for Caste identity:

Caste consciousness is the slogan of modern India. Different castes have been working for caste identity and upliftment.

(xii) Changing pattern of Jajamani system:

With the growth of education, the age old traditional beliefs and practices are fast moving out of the society. So also the traditional practices like Jajamani system is also getting depleted.

Attitudinal Changes:

(i) Declining nature of belief in ascriptive status:

The socio economic liberalisation has broken the hereditary occupation based social status. It has enabled the underprivileged to come to the mainstream and be a part of decision making process rather than a doormat and powerless section of the society.

(ii) Philosophical transition:

The traditional philosophical practices have got transformation with increased inclusiveness. The philosophy that has formulated the caste system has been doubted and out rightly rejected by various major groups. New philosophy that takes all people hand in hand with a liberal stand against strict caste hierarchy has evolved.

Summary

Caste is a collection of families bears a common name, claiming a common descent from a mythical ancestor, human or divine, professing to follow the same hereditary calling and is regarded by those who are competent to give an opinion as forming a single homogeneous community (Herbert Risley). Ketkar defines caste as “a social group having two characteristics – (i) membership is confined to those who are born of members and includes all persons so born; (ii) the members are forbidden by an inexorable social law to marry outside the caste”. As per M.N. Srinivas, Caste is a hereditary, endogamous, usually localised group, having a traditional association with an occupation and a particular position in the local hierarchy of castes. Relations between castes are governed, among other things, by the concepts of pollution and purity and generally, maximum commensality occurs within the caste. Caste which further defines the social hierarchy of its individuals based on power, prestige etc. Caste structure is formed on the basis of the birth of the individual. The caste theory in practice differentiates ‘pure’ from impure’ in order to protect life from death. It creates the hierarchical classification of the four main ‘verna’ and a number of jatis or castes which are based on series of gradations of ritual and religious purity, high and low status, and eating and drinking habits. The functional role of caste as a unit explains the status of equal individuals; caste also acts as a system which maintains the characters of the very caste and its members. Caste has been perceived as a cultural concept which is based on certain ideas, beliefs and values. Similarly caste from a structural point of view acts to maintain the status and roles of the involved population. Caste explains the segmentation character of the society that small social groups called caste formulates the society. Social superiority and inferiority are defined as per Caste status. . While Brahmins occupy the top hierarchical position, Sudras are at the lower. Kshatriyas are in the second position in hierarchy followed by Vaisyas formulate the total caste system in India. Endogamy is the most fundamental character of the caste system that directs a member of a particular caste to marry within his or he own caste or sub caste. The caste system is conceived on the basis of occupation. Having or sharing food is an important character of caste structure and hierarchy. As Prof. GS Ghurye says, ‘caste is a small and complete world for the individual with differentiating from others’. The origin of caste system is often understood of starting after the Aryan invasion or after the establishment of indo Aryan societal system. There are various theories regarding caste system like, racial theory, political theory, occupational theory, traditional theory, religious theory, evolutionary theory, theory of sanscritisation, theory of dominant caste, theory of fission and fusion. With the changes in the social economic arena, there has been a substantial change in the caste system in different parts of India. Conceptually the Change pattern in the caste system can be identified as structural, functional band attitudinal.

References

• Baechler, J.1988. La Solution Indienne: Essai sur les Origines du Régime des Castes. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
• Barth, F.1959. The System of Social Stratification in Swat, North Pakistan. In Leach, E. R. (ed.),Aspects of Caste in South India, Ceylon and North-West Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Berger, P. L. and Berger, B.1972. Sociology: A Biographical Approach. New York: Basic Books.
• Berreman, G.1979. Caste and Other Inequities: Essays on Inequality. Meerut: Folklore Institute.
• Béteille, A.1965. Caste, Class and Power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• 1991. The Reproduction of Inequality: Occupation, Caste and Family. Contributions to Indian Sociology 25: 3–28.1992. Caste and Family in Representations of Indian Society. Anthropology Today 8: 13–18.
• Burghart, R.1978. Hierarchical Models of the Hindu Social system. Man 13: 519–536.
• Caplan, L.1975. Administration and Politics in a Nepalese Town. London: Oxford University Press.
• Chinoy, E.1967. Society: An Introduction to Sociology. New York: Random House.
• Cohn, B. S.1970. Society and Social Change under the Raj. South Asian Review 4: 27–49.
• Davis, K.1948. Human Society. New York: Macmillan.
• Deliège, R.1992. Replication and Consensus: Untouchability, Caste and Ideology in India. Man 27: 155–173.
• 1993. Le Système des Castes. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
• 1999 [1995]. The Untouchables of India. Oxford: Berg.
• Dirks, N. B.1989. The Invention of Caste: Civil Society in Colonial India. Social Analysis 25: 42–52.1992. Castes of Mind. Representations 37: 56–78.
• Dumont, L. 1966. The Village Community from Munro to Maine. Contributions to Indian Sociology9: 67–89.1980 [1966]. Homo Hierarchicus: The Caste System and its Implications. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Fuller, C. J.1977. British India or Traditional India? An Anthropological Problem. Ethnos 42: 95–121. 1984. Servants of the Goddess: The Priests of a South Indian Temple. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.1992. The Camphor Flame: Popular Hinduism and Society in India. Princeton: Princeton University Press.(ed.) 1966. Caste Today. Delhi: Oxford University Press.
• Fürer-Haimendorf, C. von 1956. Elements of Newar Social Structure. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 86: 15–38.
• Galey, J.-Cl. 1989. Reconsidering Kingship in India: An Ethnological Perspective. History and Anthropology 4: 123–187.
• Gellner, D. N. 1982. Max Weber, Capitalism and the Religion of India. Sociology 16: 506–543.
• 1992. Monk,  Householder  and  Tantric  Priest:  Newar  Buddhism  and  its  Hierarchy  of  Ritual.  Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
• Gellner, D. N. and Quigley, D. (eds.)1995. Contested Hierarchies: A Collaborative Ethnography of caste among the Newars of the  KathmanduValley, Nepal. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Ghurye, G. S.1932. Caste and Race in India. London: Kegan Paul.Giddens, A. 1989. Sociology. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Girard, R.1995 [1972]. Violence and the Sacred. London: Athlone.Good, A.1993. Polemic against Dumontian Orthodoxy. Review of Quigley (1993). Current Anthropology 34: 797–798.
• Gutschow, N. and Michaels, A. (eds.) 1987. Heritage of the Kathmandu Valley. Sankt Augustin: VGH Wissenschaftsverlag.
• Hall, J. A.1985. Powers and Liberties: The Causes and Consequences of the Rise of the West. Oxford: Basil Blackwell (published by Penguin, Harmondsworth in 1986).
• Hamilton, M. and Hirszowicz, M.1987. Class and Inequality in Pre-Industrial, Capitalist and Communist Societies. Sussex: Wheatsheaf – NewYork: St. Martin’s Press.
• Heesterman, J.1985 [1964]. Brahmin, Ritual and Renouncer. In The Inner Conflict of Tradition: Essays in Indian Ritual,Kingship and Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Hocart, A. M.1950 [1938]. Caste: A Comparative Study. London: Methuen.
• Inden, R.1986.
• Orientalist Constructions of India. Modern Asian Studies 20: 401–446.1990. Imagining India. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
• Isaacs, H. R.1964. India’s Ex-Untouchables. New York: Harper & Row.
• Juergensmeyer, M.1982. Religion as Social Vision: The Movement against Untouchability in 20th Century Punjab. Berkeley:University of California Press.
• Klass, M.1980. Caste: The Emergence of the South Asian Social System. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues.
• Kolenda, P. M.1978. Caste in Contemporary India: Beyond Organic Solidarity. London: Benjamin/Cummings.
• Leach, E. R.1960. What should we mean by caste? In Leach, E. R. (ed.), Aspects of Caste in South India, Ceylon and North-West Pakistan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Levy, R. with the collaboration of Rajopadhyaya, K. R.1990. Mesocosm: Hinduism and the Organization of a Traditional Newar City in Nepal. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Macfarlane, A. D. J.1992/1993. Louis Dumont and the Origins of Individualism. Cambridge Anthropology16: 1–28.
• Marriott, M.1968. Caste Ranking and Food Transactions: A Matrix Analysis. In Singer, M., and Cohn, B. S. (eds.), Structureand Change in IndianSociety. Chicago: Aldine.
• Marriott, M. and Inden, R. B.1985 [1974]. Social Stratification: Caste. In Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th edn. Vol. 27 (pp. 348–356).
• Meillasoux, C.1973. Y a-t-il des cases aux Indes? Cahiers Internationaux de Sociologie 14: 5–23.
• Menscher, J.1974. The Caste System Upside Down, or the Not So Mysterious East. Current Anthropology 15: 469–493.
• Moffatt, M.1979. An Untouchable Community in South India: Structure and Consensus. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Parry, J. P.1979. Caste and Kinship in Kangra. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.1980. Ghosts, Greed and Sin: the Occupational Identity of the Benares Funeral Priests.Man 15: 88–111.1986. The Gift, the Indian Gift and the ‘Indian Gift’. Man 21: 453–473.Pinney, C.1989. Representations of India: Normalisation and the ‘Other’. Pacific Viewpoint 29: 144–162.
• Pocock, D. F.1960. Sociologies: Urban and Rural. Contributions to Indian Sociology 4: 63–81.
• Quigley, D.1986.  Introversion and  Isogamy:  Marriage  Patterns  of  the  Newars  of  Nepal.Contributions to  IndianSociology 20: 75–95.1993. The Interpretation of Caste. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• 1995a. śres,t­,has:     Heterogeneity among  Hindu  Patron  Lineages.  In  Gellner,  D.  N.  and  Quigley,  D.(eds.), Newar Society: A Collaborative Ethnography of a Complex Caste System. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• 1995b. Caste Organization and the Ancient City. In Gellner, D. N. and Quigley, D. (eds.), Newar Society: A Collaborative Ethnography of a Complex Caste System. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Social Mobility and Social Fragmentation in the Newar Caste System. In Lienhard, S. (ed.), Change and Continuity in the Nepalese Culture of the Kathmandu Valley. Turin: CESMEO.
• Scapegoats: The Killing of Kings and Ordinary People. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 6: 237–254.
• Raheja, G. G.1988a. The Poison in the Gift: Ritual, Prestation and the Dominant Caste in a North Indian Village. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
• 1988b. India: Caste, Kingship and Dominance Reconsidered. Annual Review of Anthropology 17: 497–522.
• Rettie, J.India’s Oppressed Millions Awaken. The Guardian newspaper: March 5th, p. 12.
• Risley, H. H.
• The Tribes and Castes of Bengal. Ethnographic Glossary. 2 vols. Calcutta: Bengal Secretariat Press.
• The Peoples of India. London: Thacker, W.
• Rosser, C.
• Social Mobility in the Newar Caste System. In von Fürer-Haimendorf, C. (ed.),Caste and Kin in Nepal, India and Ceylon. Bombay: Asia Publishing House.
• Said, E. W.Orientalism. New York: Pantheon.
• Shah, A. M. and Shroff, R. G.The Vahivancha Barots of Gujerat: a Caste of Genealogists and Mythographers.Journal of American Folklore 71: 248–278.
• Traditional India: Structure and Change. Philadelphia: American Folklore Society.
• Toffin, G.
• Société et Religion chez les Newar du Népal. Paris: CNRS.
• Le Palais et le Temple: La Fonction Royale dans la Vallée du Népal. Paris: CNRS.Weber, M.
• The Religion of India: The Sociology of Hinduism and Buddhism. New York: Free Press.
• Yalman, N.On Royalty, Caste and Temples in Sri Lanka and South India. Social Analysis 25: 142–149.