LOUIS DUMONT
LOUIS DUMONT (1911-1998)
BOOK: HOMO HIERARCHICUS: THE CASTE SYSTEM AND ITS IMPLICATION
ü First
written in French (1966)
ü In
1970 it was translated and made available in English language
ü Dumont’s
contribution to the study of caste system in India is monumental.
ü Though
Dumont was severely criticized for its inherent biases but cannot dismiss
because of its inclusive insights.
ü Major
Works:
ü Homo
Hierarchicus
ü From
Mandeville to Marx: The Genesis and Triumph of Economic Ideology (1977)
ü Dumont
was a French scholar, basically tried to communicate with French people and
especially this book Homo Hierarchicus. Basically he has kept the French
audience in mind and the book is written for them.
ü Homo
Hierarchicus: Dense, Theoretical and Unorthodox approach
ü L.
Dumont was a scholar of international renown. Dumont was working in the domain
of sociology, social anthropology and Indology.
ü The
subject he has written have an impressive range and include:
Hinduism
Kinship
Marriage
Kinship in ancient India
Social and political movements in modern India etc.
ü Dumont
was a structuralist. He did extensive ethnographic work. He collected material
from Tamil Nadu. The Kallars were one of his major important study. (Pramalai
Kallars: The caste)
ü Dumont
was also an expert in Indology. He had enormous command over Sanskrit and he
also used the data from the field study which is quite interesting.
ü On
one side Indologist never cared about what the field data means. They heavily
relied on ancient texts or Sanskritic texts.
ü The
structural functionalists never cared about Sanskritic text rather they prefer
field data. (M.N. Srinivas is the best example)
ü Louis
Dumont is combination of Indology and Empirical approach.
ü Dumont
was very much critical to the British scholars regarding the definition of
caste. Western scholars’ definition of caste as a type of stratification is
Eurocentric.
ü British
scholars understood caste system as a very brutal and inhuman way of treating
other humans even though they themselves were practicing Slavery.
ü He
argued that the task of the Sociologists and anthropologists is to understand
the most fundamental principle of the phenomena what he argued as a kind of
structuralist.
ü Dumont
followed Bougle one of the French
masters. Bougle chooses the Hindu notion of the fundamental opposition between
the PURE and IMPURE.
ü As
his starting point of understanding caste Bougle provided a very insightful
understanding of caste system.
ü Pure
and impure : these binaries are very important. Binary way of presenting things
or binary way of understanding phenomena is something very central to the
structuralist argument.
ü Bougle
had defined caste system as comprising of hierarchically arranged hereditay
groups separated from each other in a certain respect that is
Caste
endogamy
Restriction
of eating together and
On
physical contact
(But interdependent on others for example the
JAJMANI SYSTEM: Jajmani system is a traditional division of labor)
ü Caste
is a vertical and hierarchical arrangement of groups with the notion of
superiority and inferiority. It is a hereditary group: means you are born into
that group and your offspring’s are born into that particular group.
ü It
was Dumont who actually makes this Bougle’s arguments about all these features
into a kind of more structuralist argument saying that a principle which
fundamentally determining the nature of Hindu caste is the opposition of PURE
and IMPURE. These two binaries placed in a highly opposed manner.
ü According
to Dumont endogamy, rules ensuring separation of groups and division of labor:
all three dependent on the opposition of pure and impure.
ü According
to Dumont: All castes are hierarchically arranged. It is opposition between
pure and impure. In this binary society and everybody prefers the pure.
ü So
the pure always kept on top (superior) and impure that is kept on the bottom
(inferior). Pure and impure must be kept separated otherwise pure also becomes
impure.
ü Pure
and impure occupation likewise must be kept separate. So division of labor is
on the basis of pure and impure. For example priest, warrior, teacher
considered as pure occupation that is why considered superior occupation.
ü A
person who is dealing with human hair, human excreta or dealing with carcasses
of dead animals considered impure so they must be kept separated from the pure
occupations.
ü Thus
pure and impure must be kept separate but on the same time they also co-exist
(Jajmani system)
ü Superiority
of the pure over impure is the key of Dumont’s model of caste.
ü This
notion is quite independent of natural inequalities or the distribution of
power. He says that the ways in which inequalities are seen in the world or the
way in which you know the power whether it is economic or political is
distributed –these ways in which power is being articulated or natural
inequalities, they are all very independent of the way in which the pure is
understood, identified and distinguished from that of impure.
ü It
is a principle by which the element of a whole are ranked in relation to the
whole.
ü Example: a caste group
of washerman: Washer man is assigned a particular position in the ritual
hierarchy not on the basis of economic or political power but on the basis of
how this overall logic of the separation and co-existence between purity and
pollution is decided.
ü There
are castes which are superior to washerman and there are castes which are inferior
to washerman. So that is the principle by which the element of a whole ranked in
relation to the whole.
ü Dumont
sees his task as the construction of a model of the traditional caste system of
an Ideal Type. (Ideal Type : A methodological construct by Max Weber)
Separation from
purity with impurity,
co-existence of pure and impure groups,
co-existence must be governed by rules and regulations that ensure their separation
mutual dependenc
hierarchy (All brought together within a single theoretical framework.)
ü According
to Dumont India is composed of many small territories and caste. Every caste is
limited to a particular and definite geographical area. Marrying outside one’s
own caste is not possible in the caste system.
ü Dumont
argues that one cannot speak of caste without mentioning the Varna. Ideological
framework of Varna and empirical reality of caste has not much difference.
Varna is a pan Indian phenomena and its emergence lies in cultural concept
while caste is a regional phenomenon. Caste rise and fall, they are not born of
occupation. Caste is concerned with access to power.
ü Fundamental
argument of Dumont is that caste system has to be understood as something that
is founded on a foundation principle of the opposition between pure and impure.
ü This
king of hierarchy is RITUAL HIERARCHY.
It is based on the ritual notion of purity and pollution.
ü Brahmins
are considered at top not because they are politically powerful, have more
power, or economically powerful but they are ritually considered to be pure. Certain
other castes are considered as impure not because they have no power, not
because they are not economically strong but because they are considered to be ritually
impure. This is pure hierarchy – RITUAL HIERARCHY
ü Dumont
said that this Varna system fits perfectly with this theory of Pure hierarchy.
ü Thus
if hierarchy is isolated as purely religious value then its connection with power
needs to be defined. Many times Brahmin are not at the top in the context of
power, they are somewhere in the middle.
ü There
is an absolute distinction between priesthood and royalty. According to Dumont
in India at some point of time in history there was an absolute distinction
between the priest and the king (clearly separated in terms of power and ritual
hierarchy)
ü In
theory power is ultimately subordinated to priesthood whereas in practice
priesthood subordinates power. King cannot perform Yajnas or Pujas. King was dependent
on priest to perform Yajnas and worship. A political authority (King) cannot perform
Yajnas or cannot be a priest. A Political head cannot be a religious head. In
India it is totally separated.
Hence the absence of supreme spiritual authority in India i.e. supremacy of spiritual authority was never expressed politically.
ü The
disjunction of power and status is older than caste and only after that
hierarchy can manifest itself in a pure form. For example Jajmani system was
based on religious values not economic logic.
ü Dumont
also talks about regulation of marriage means the rules of endogamy, isogamy,
hypergamy etc.
ü Hence
the absence of supreme spiritual authority in India i.e. supremacy of spiritual
authority was never expressed politically.
ü The
disjunction of power and status is older than caste and only after that
hierarchy can manifest itself in a pure form. For example Jajmani system was
based on religious values not economic logic.
ü Dumont
also talks about regulation of marriage means the rules of endogamy, isogamy,
hypergamy etc.
Comments