Introduction
Wiser (1939), Bailey (1960), Majumdar (1960), Heralod Gould, Bererman (1960), Paulin Kolenda (1979), and others studied the inter-relations of caste and economy in Pre-British India, British India and post independent India. In this regard:
- a) Some studied how caste and economy interrelated
- b) Some examines how caste and why caste ahs changed its occupation over generations.
- c) Some analysed how land came into market and what, it brought out in caste and economy.
- d) A few discussed the change in the Jamani system.
- e) Some described the overall changes in caste and economy.
Caste and economy Pre-British period
According to anthropological researches, the inter-relation of caste and economy was very close during the Pre-British period. N.K. Bose suggests that during the Vedic times, members of the same family pursued a variety of occupations. However, instructions set in gradually and by the time of Dharmasastras, the tradition became rigid prescribing particular occupations to specific castes.
The ideological of caste prescribed specific occupations for specific castes. The Brahmins were priests. The Kshatriyas were rules. The Vaisyas were traders. The Vellals, Vokkalogas, Jats, patidans, Rhunihans, Reddys, Kammas, and so on were agriculturists. Caste superiority and occupational purity were compatible with each other. The status of service-rendering castes and their occupations were in perfect correspondence with each other. Thus caste occupation highlighted harmonious matching between caste and economy.
As centuries passed, different kingdoms came into being. The rules did not own the land of the whole kingdom. They had their own personal lands known as crown lands. They had the power to distribute their regime. Besides unclaimed land due to lack of heirs, confiscated land was distributed by the rules on the basis of their personal distribution. It is this fact which enabled certain castes such as Brahmins Rajputs and Kayasthers in the Northern Indians and Brahmins, Naird, Vellalas, Vokkaligas and Reddys in the SouthernIndia to become landowning castes. With their better resources, in course of time these castes acquired more and more land in the villages. The lower-ranking landless castes had to be contest with tenancy and possession of a mere subsistence. Thus caste and economy was closely interwoven during the Pre-British period.
Caste and economy during British period
The relationship between caste and economy received a jolt during the British period when the British introduced new revenue systems, plantations, trade activities quick transport facilities, cash crops, irrigation projects, educational institutions and job opportunities. In this context, the British introduced permanent settlement in 1793. This land reform brought out new revenue systems namely Zamindari, Mahalwari, and Ryotwari. The Zamindari system created a class of permanent land owners in India. These land grantees became intermediaries between the British rules and the native peasants especially the families of castes who were traditional agriculturists in the united provinces, parts of eastern Punjab and Bengal presidency. The Zamindars were absentee landlords. The tenantry worked for the Zamindars who gave them a certain quantum of grain as payment of rent. Even in the Zamindari system caste and economy matched according to tradition. The Ryotwari differed from Zamindari because the ryots paid the revenue directly to the government Ryotwari prevailed in Punjab, Bombay and Madras Presidencies. The ryots belonged to the castes of traditional agriculturists like Aheris, Jats, Vokkaligas, Lingayats, Vellalas, Mudaliars, Reddys, Kammas, Nairs and others acquired title deeds to the agricultural lands. Even in Ryot wan rylans caste and economy were in correspondence with each other.
From 1800 onwards several changes occurred in the relationship between caste and land had become a commodity of commercial value. The ryots could purchase lands, sell away lands and exchange lands. On account of this development land changed lands. F.G.Bailey (1955:146) studied an Oriya village called Bisipara due to the coming of land into the market and extension of the economic frontier (the increasing impact of Outside influences that have reached the village as a result of market economy). Some castes who migrated to Bisipara established themselves as liquor extractors and sellers and became rich within years. They were able to purchase the lands from those agriculturists who were in dire need of money and put their hands for sale. What happened in the village was that as a result of market economy, the sources of income were not confined to land and agriculture alone. A person participated as an individual in commercial economy. The village witnessed a breakdown of the traditional division of labour and division of wealth according to caste changed. A single caste came to have several occupations. Also, single caste came to have ceased to be the monopoly of a single caste. Higher caste status and higher occupational status ceased to be perfect correlates. Caste and economy were not in correction with each other, as agriculture of trade became caste-free occupations.
When the British introduced new economic forces political and educational changes in t he nineteenth century it was the already powerful, wealthy upper castes, such as the Brahmins, Rajputs, Vaishyas, Ahirs, Jats, Kayasthas, Bhumihars, Patidars, Nairs, Reddys, Kammas, Okkaligas, and Lingayats who benefited from political and administrative power (Kothari 1970:9). All these upper castes responded first to English education and therefore entered new professions, new jobs and services the same pattern was visible in the commercial sectors also. The great business houses like Birlas, Dalmias etc belonged to the traditional commercial castes in banking, the castes like the Chattiars of South established in the system of banking and service, which was an extension of their traditional occupation. Similarly, the establishment of irrigation projects, introduction of cash crops, plantations and industries benefited the upper castes. As a result, they prospered by agriculture; industrial they prospered by agriculture, industrial activity and administrative employment. Caste and economy, failed to have perfect association in the changed circumstances because agriculture, trader, and employment in government services because caste-free occupations.
Similar associations of caste and economy contributed in the twentieth century also. Kingsley Davis (1940) calculated that only 50% of male workers were engaged in occupations traditionally associated with their castes. The data clearly demonstrates that in more of the cases was there a close correlation between caste and traditional occupations.
The questions that need to be asked be and answered are the following: what were the occupations of the remaining persons belonging to these castes? were all persons engaged in these occupations drawn from these specific castes? If not, which castes supplied them? We are not in a position to answer these questions for want of data. But the nature of available data suggests several possibilities. Firstly, a particular caste may have several traditional occupations. Secondly, a particular occupation may be the traditional occupation of the a more castes. Thirdly, a set of castes may simultaneously follow a set occupation. That is the linkage between caste and occupation has contributed be a shifting one.
Caste and economy in the modern period
In the modern period, it is difficult to indicate that there is a close and rigid association between caste and economy. Recent trends in occupational mobility should hoe the land-owing groups drawn mainly from upper castes namely Brahmins, Rajputs, Bhuminhars, Nairs, Vellalas, Reddys, Kammas, Okkaligas, Lingayats, Jats and soon are forced to take up non-traditional occupations as they lost their land due to Zamindars or Jagindent abolition and implementation of land reforms. What type of non-traditional occupations they take depended on their resources such as education or skill a amount of capital.
While some of them took to modern prestigious occupations such as top administration, medicine, engineering, information technology, entrepreneurship and experienced upward mobility, a substantial proportion among them is experiencing downward mobility. The castes which cultivated land as tenants, share-croppers and owner-cultivation like Jats, Ahirs, Kumis, Ezhavas found reinforcement of their traditional in the wake of Zamindari abolition or implementation of land reforms and extension of state subsidies for agriculture.
Not only that their rights in land got legally entrenched due to the new legislations but their emergence as prosperous farmers leading to upwards mobility. The new generation of some of trade castes have taken to modern education and want to be in modern occupations. But lacking in social network and urban sophistication they find it difficult to complete with the upper castes and hence demand protection of their interests through the extension of the policy of reservations. The new generation of the remaining members of these castes have taken to cultivation because cultivation of land is still an honourable
occupation in the villages. They tried to break down the stability of upper caste monopolies over land which was enforced by family inheritance. Ownership of land provided principles governing wealth and a yardstick by which the local prestige system was measured the low castes were this able to surmount the obstacles passed by tradition and began to participate in the economic process, for example, Ardre Beteille (1970)cites the cases of Sripuram ,a village in Tanjaore District of Tamil Nadu. In Siripuram these was breakdown of the traditional economic system and the emergence of lower caste groups in economic rivalry rather than co-operation, undermining the Brahmin dominance. This has been attributed to the changing village structure from a closed stationary system to that of a relatively open system. The closed system was characteristic of feudal economy resulting in cooperation between ranked castes in ways oriented by religious ideas. An open system is one, which is governed by secular law under the influence of market economy.
Today, it is more difficult to indicate that these is a close and rigid association between caste and economy. Firstly, upper castes follow a set of occupations. The Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, Nairsa, Vellals, Okkaligas, Lingayats, Jats, Reddys, Kammas, Patidars, Bhuminhars, and others each follow traditional and non-traditional occupations. Secondly, the service rending castes in the villages are also following multiple occupations. The Jajman asystem which was a hereditary patron-client relationship, with master, lost most of its insularity. Market economy, daily wages, and hired labour eroded steadily into the functioning of the traditional Jajmani system. Thirdly, the mobilisation by the other Backward Classes demanding representation in government jobs proportionate to their population indicate the status and occupational incongruence experienced by the other Backward Classes. Fourthly, the Scheduled castes contributed by agricultural labours or engaged in occupations such as shoe or rope making did not benefit land reforms. Most of them continue in traditional occupations when they shift from their earlier occupations. But thanks to the policy of reservation a small section belonging to the scheduled castes and scheduled tribes manage entry into modern white-collar occupations and prestigious profession thereby experiencing an upward mobility. Thus today, the linkage between caste and economy is a shifting one.
Conclusion
In the Pre-British period, the association between caste and economy was very close. The relationship between caste and economy received a jolt during the British period when the British introduced new revenue system, new farm techniques, trade activities, quick transport facilities, irrigation projects, educational institutions and job opportunities between 1793 and 1890. Land came into market. It was available to any who had money to purchase. Moreover, all castes acquired multiple occupations. The linkage between caste and economy because a shifting one. The same continued in modern period. Today also the association between caste and economy continues to be a shifting one.