On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Ulhas Joglekar wrote:
> The caste system is said have emerged over centuries during the Vedic
> period, beginning roughly in 1500 BC. I mean by caste well known
> division of Indian society into four categories: Priests (brahmins),
> Warriors (kshatriyas), Traders and farmers (vaisyas) outside and sudras,
> the lowest sub-caste.
My impression from the standard works of history is that:
(1) this four part division was basically the three part division we Europeans know so well from our own Aryan past -- the division of society into Warriors, Priests and Peasants -- with the difference that in India, the preexisting groups weren't chased out, absorbed, exterminated or completely marginalized (e.g., the Basques), but instead remained numerous enough to form a fourth group, the Shudras, or untouchables. So that it was originally almost a racial division between Aryans and non Aryans, and largely mapped onto a north/south, light skin/dark skin division; and
(2) that although "caste" is commonly used to refer to that basic four part division; and for many people in modern india those divisions are been the last ones to go when all others have been forgotten; still, when people start talking about "caste theoretically" they are almost always referring not to the four basic classes, but to the the 5000 jatis which seem to have pre-existed the Aryan invasion/migration and and to later have been synthesized with this four part class division. In this view, the 5000 jatis are occupational and religious in their original conception, which is attached to the idea of karma: there is an order to the universe, and virtue consists of contributing to this harmony by fulfilling the carefully prescribed duties of the occupation one has been born into. Then over time intermarriage and linguistic bonds eventually gave them more of a clannish character.
Is that wrong?
Michael