Census and Caste Enumeration

8/12/2019 Census and Caste Enumeration

1/16

GENUS, LXII(No. 2), 119-134

119

RAM B. BHAGAT

Census and caste enumeration:

British legacy and contemporary practice in India

1. INTRODUCTION

The discipline of demography is not accustomed to view census as

having an interface with society and power. For demographers, census is ascientific exercise and their role is confined to examining the nature ofcensus data and its interpretation. However, scholars of history, political

science and anthropology have tried to look at census very differently fromthe way in which demographers usually did. In recent years, it has been a

subject of great interest with the proposition that census has not only countedpeople and communities, but in the process of counting, it has been involvedin creating communities or fundamentally altering the traits of existingcommunities (Cohen, 1987).

Census develops a non-overlapping scheme of classification, and eachperson has a definite place in predefined categories. If a person does not fallin any of them, a category of otheris usually added. However, census does

not work in vacuum, but reflects the perception of those who are involved inthe census exercise right from the inclusion of a question in the census todefining the categories. The political process also influences the introductionof new categories and their counting in census as new politicized groupsdemand to be enumerated to justify their share in power. Seen from thisperspective, census categories are not neutral, but are politically constructedand finally adopted.

While it is true that census mirrors the political processes, at the same

time it has also some independent effects on the construction of ethnic andsocial groups as well. The specific definition of ethnic, racial, social and

linguistic groups adopted by the census on the advice of experts, and also therecognition of one group while overlooking others, have serious implications

on the formation of ethnic identities. Census can also gerrymander theadministrative boundaries creating majority and minority groups (Arel,2002: 823-24; Bhagat, 2001: 4354). In countries like the US, Canada, thepost-Soviet states, Great Britain, Brazil and India, census has been engagedin the categorization and enumeration of race, ethnicity and nationalitieswhich have been hotly debated and contested in recent years (Nobles, 2000;Prewitt, 2001; Arel, 2002; Kertzer and Arel, 2002; Bhagat, 2003). In Great


2/16

RAM B. BHAGAT

120

Britain and the US, racial and ethnic data are also intended to work as a toolfor immigration control and for shaping the immigration policies of thesecountries (Massey, 1995; Bhagat, 2003). In France, the classification of theimmigrant population based on their origin such as place of birth or mothertongue raised several objections. It is said that these criteria by definition arefixed and do not reflect the dynamic nature of the immigrant population andtheir change over time. Instead, it would be appropriate if individuals of theimmigrant population were classified according to their membership in the

social network which shapes their behaviour (A. Blum quoted in Leridon,1999:190).

India is a country of immense religious, ethnic and cultural diversityevolving over the last five millennia. But, the boundaries between differentcommunities had not always been clear in the past. This prompted scholarsto characterize Indians belonging to fuzzy communities (Das, 1994: 8;Kaviraj, 1993: 20). Several scholars also argued that modern politicizedcommunities in India found their definite geographical and social boundariesthrough census enumeration initiated during British rule (Jones, 1981; Cohn,1987; Anderson, 1991; Kaviraj, 1993; Appaduarai, 1993). Further, censuswas viewed as an instrument of domination along with map and museumduring colonial rule (Anderson, 1991:163).

Caste is the most important identity of Indian people together withreligion. The question on religion in the census has been studied in detail

elsewhere (Jones, 1981; Bhagat, 2001). But the caste question in Indiancensuses has not been given adequate treatment in demographic literature. Itis generally believed that caste is a status based on social origin in the Hindu

society, ranging from Brahmins (priestly castes) at the top, followed byKshatriya(warrior castes), Vaishyas(trading castes) and Shudras(labouring

castes) at the bottom of the social ladder. However, in reality, within each ofthe Varna category there existed numerous castes and sub-castes whosenames were not similar in the different parts of India and their position insocial hierarchy was also not clear.

According to Dirk the way British officials understood caste reflectedin the census categorization and enumeration, and it affected the way castewas practiced. This led to some quite innovative relations between Jatis

(castes) all over India (Dirk, 2001:10). Contrary to this proposition, someresearchers also believe that it is not correct to say that colonialism createdthe religious and caste categories in India; they were already present beforethe arrival of the British, but it did make a difference in the formation ofcommunal and caste identities in the country (Gupta, 2004).

Although complete caste enumeration was discontinued in independent

India, there was a strong debate to include caste in the 2001 census in light


3/16

CENSUS AND CASTE ENUMERATION: BRITISH LEGACY AND PRACTICE IN INDIA

121

of the Government of India granting reservation of jobs to the OtherBackward Classes (OBCs) in the early 1990s (Pinto, 1998; Deshpande andSunder, 1998). This new situation warranted examining the caste questionafresh in censuses of both British and independent India.

Thus the present paper attempts to study the changing enumeration ofcaste and its categorisation in Indian censuses and also the engagement ofthe state in the reconstruction of caste identities in the country. Itdemonstrates how census follows the political processes of caste

categorisation and counts them accordingly. It further shows that thedilemma to include caste in 2001 census was politically constituted.

2. CENSUS AND CASTE: THE BRITISH EXPERIMENT

There were several reasons why the British Government started census1

in India. From an administrative point of view, clear knowledge of thecomposition of Indian society was necessary to exert control and extractrevenue. During this time, a new classificatory trend in the Europeanintellectual tradition was also emerging which motivated the BritishGovernment to develop a taxonomy based on their perception of Indiansocieties primarily belonging to primordial categories (Bandyopadhyay,1992:26).

Since the very first census of 1872

2

the colonial Governmentincorporated caste and religious categories in the enumeration of the Indianpopulation. Along with caste, the census also incorporated the categories of

tribe and race, but the distinction between them was often obscure. Forexample Jats and Rajputs two important castes of northern India were

also mentioned as tribes in the 1891 census (Baines, 1893). However, as of1901, the category of tribe was incorporated for the first time in the census

1Guha (2003) argues that census enumeration was not a novel practice adopted by the British,but was equally practiced in earlier times particularly in the Moghul period. But the fact

remains that the earlier enumerations were very much confined to the purposes of landrevenue and taxation and also geographically very much limited. In contrast to this, the

colonial census was interested in anthropological knowledge and was carried out coveringmost parts of the country.2 It was decided by the British Government as early as in 1856 to hold census in 1861 inIndia. But the census could not be held due to mutiny in 1857. In 1865, the Government ofIndia and the Home Government again had agreed upon the principle that a generalpopulation census would be taken in 1871. But, the years 1867-72 were actually spent in

census taking. This series of census is in fact known as the Census of 1872, which was neither

a synchronous census nor covered the entire territory controlled by the British (Srivastava,1972: 9).


4/16

RAM B. BHAGAT

122

schedule along with race and caste. The category of race or tribe was appliedto religious groups not belonging to the Hindu and Jain religions, whereasthe category of caste was applied only to Hindus until 1891, and since the1901 census Jains were also added (see Table 1). From the census side, noattempt had been made to define caste, race or tribe. For instance, the CensusCommissioner of the 1931 census, J.H. Hutton, clarified that

the term caste needs no definition in India; tribe was provided to cover the

many communities still organized on the basis in whose case the tribe has not

become a caste; it was likewise determinate enough, and no attempt was

made to define the term race which was generally used so loosely as almostto defy any definition.

However, the category of race was primarily included to obtain areturn of Indians to whom the terms like caste and tribe are inapplicable(Hutton, 1931:425).

Even though no attempt was made to define the categories like caste,tribe and race3, still the Indian population was classified as far as possible

into mutually exclusive groups. In respect to caste, it was generallyoverlooked that caste had been a dynamic and mobile category of Indiansociety. It is evident in the reports of none other than the censuscommissioners themselves. J.H. Hutton noted in 1931 census report that,

a caste which had applied in one province to be called Brahman (priestly

caste) asked in another to be called Rajput (warrior caste) and there areseveral instances at this census of castes claiming to be Brahman who

claimed to be Rajputs ten years ago.

These are not the casual remarks of a distinguished censuscommissioner but very important to understand that caste identity has notbeen a fixed entity in Indian history. This is further buttressed when E. A.Gait, the Census Commissioner of 1911 census wrote about the dynamics ofcaste as follows:

apparently caste looked fixed and immutable category, but this is by no

means the case. In fact, new castes come up as necessity arises and old

disappears. The process of change is slow and imperceptible, like the

movement of the hour hand of a watch, but it is nevertheless always goingon. When one section of a caste develops peculiarities of any kind a

different occupation, habitat or social practice, or more rarely, a different

3The question on religion, caste and race was introduced in the census of colonial India by

the British Government in sharp contrast to the census taking in Great Britain where a

question on ethnicity was introduced only in the 1991 census and the question on religion waskept apart from enumeration until the 2001 census (Peach, 2000; Bhagat, 2001).


5/16


123

Table 1 Caste and related categories in Indian censuses, 1872 to 1951

Census Caste and related categories Remark

1872 Caste or Class

i) Castes of Hindus were recorded.ii) The ethnic categories of Muslims such as

Syed, Sheikh, Pathan and Moghul werereferred to as classes.

1881Caste if Hindus; sect if ofother religion

i) Castes and sub-castes of Hindus wereascertained. For Muslims their main sects like

Shia, Sunni , Fararis and Wahbis were

ascertained.ii) Christians were divided into Roman

Catholics, Presbyterians, Baptists,

Wesleyans; the Armenians as belonging tothe Greek or Syrian rite or if not belonging to

any of these denominations, they were putunder the heading of others.

1891 Caste or Racei) Castes and sub-castes of Hindus were asked;ii) Races such as Burman, Korean, Talaing and

European, Eurasian were recorded.

1901Caste of Hindus and Jains;Tribes or Race of Others

i) Caste of Hindus and Jains were recorded.ii) For Christians and Muslims, their race or

caste was accepted as given by them.

1911Caste of Hindus and Jains;Tribes or Race of Others

i) Caste of Hindus and Jains were recorded.ii) For Christians and Muslims, their race or

caste was accepted as given by them.

1921 Caste, Tribe or Race

i) Caste or tribe of Hindus, Muslims, Jains,Sikhs were recorded;

ii) Race of Christians, Buddhists and Parsis wererecorded.


i) Caste and sub-castes, or tribe was recordedfor each person.

ii) For foreigners, race was recorded as Anglo-Indian, Canadian, Goanese, Turkish etc.


i) Caste, tribe or race was recorded for everyperson.

ii) Scheduled castes and Scheduled tribes werealso identified as Scheduled Castes Order

1936.

iii) For non-Indians, the race or nationality likeFrench or Portuguese was entered.

Source: Srivastava S.C., 1972, 161-164.

religious cult the tendency is for it to regard itself and to be regarded by the

rest of the caste, as something different. The feeling goes stronger with time,

until at last it, or the main body of the caste, withdraws from the marriage

league. The result is a new sub-caste, and often, in the end, a new caste

(Gait, 1913: 371).


6/16

RAM B. BHAGAT

124

The above statement shows that caste has not been a fixed categoryhistorically. On the other hand, it is true that both internal and external forceshad shaped caste statuses. The forces shaping caste status lay in the waycastes had perceived and defined themselves in relation to other castes(Gupta, 2004). As each caste was nestled into endless number of sub-castes,their boundaries were very internal and were liable to change over time andspace

4. It is for this reason that scholars have observed that caste boundaries

remained fluid, fuzzy and dynamic historically in Indian society (Kaviraj,

1993; Bandyopdhyay, 1992; Das, 1994; Dirk, 2001). In many instances, acaste or a sub-caste had multiplied through fission or merged through a

fusion with other castes or sub-castes. For example, the dominantagricultural castes of south India such as Kamma and Reddy are of recentorigin having been formed mainly for political reasons through thecoalescence of numerous sub-castes in the early 20

thcentury (Washbrook,

1975 quoted in Upadhya, 1997: 175).The decennial census during British India, on the other hand, not only

updated the population figures, but also gave them specific names/labels andranks and tried to standardize and anchor castes in time and space. In doingso, British understanding of caste was primarily based on their reading oforiental literature as well as their reliance on Brahmin scholars whogenerally subscribed to the Varnaview of caste hierarchy5. Often, it did notpresent the way caste was actually organised in different parts of India, and

presented a view of the caste system based on the perception of outsiders andthe local elite (Bandyopadhyay, 1992).At the social level, many people thought that the object of the census

was to fix the relative social positions of the different social classes and todeal with questions of social superiority. As a result many lower caste people

placed themselves in higher castes in order to raise their social status. In thecensus, the underprivileged found an opportunity to express their aspirationand if possible to acquire a new identity through enumeration (Ghurye,1924: 169; Ahmed, 1981: 116). This led to the formation of several casteassociations adopting honorific caste names overnight and claiming descentfrom higher castes like Brahmin and Rajputs etc. (Padmanabha, 1978). Inmany places, several caste groups petitioned the census officials and

4 The ramification of caste was also observed based on their geographical location. Forexample, Brahmans could be Sariyupari (across the river Sarju in north India) or DaksiniBrahaman (a Brahmin from south India) (Guha, 2003:157).5The Census officials appointed scholars of Hindu scriptures. They had been asked to prepare

the list of all castes and their position in ritual hierarchy in the Bengal Presidency. Any doubt

or dispute regarding the origin and status of a particular caste was resolved by reference tothis list (Cohn, 1987; Bandyopadhyay, 1992).


7/16


125

demanded to be included in a different category from those on the censusand their claims were also accepted. In this way, census induced people toorganise and represent their interests in politics in terms of caste identities(Sheth, 1999). On the other hand, a number of castes were not content withthe way they were entered and grouped in the census and there waswidespread resentment over this (Cohn, 1987). For example in Bengal,Chandala was traditionally used as a generic term to identify all the lowcaste people, but this name was entered as a caste in the census. The people

who were numerated as Chandala protested and changed their name to therespectable name ofNamasudra(Bandyopadhyay, 1997). We also find that

census helped to create new castes such as Yadava and Vishwakarma orJangida by merging the diverse castes spread over different geographicalareas but with a common occupation. For example, Yadavawas created bycombining Ahirs, Goalas, Gopis, Idaiyans and some other castes of milkmenand graziers. Similarly, several artisan castes such as carpenters, smiths andgoldsmiths were grouped under the common denomination of VishwakarmaorJangida(J.H. Hutton, 1931:431).

It is worthwhile to note that caste has been an endogamous group ofIndian society, and the members of different castes speak a variety ofdialects and languages depending upon the territory where they are found.However, in the process of identifying a caste, the marriage boundary andthe linguistic status of a caste also entered into the enumeration. For

example, enumerators were required to ascertain in the case of Hindus thecaste of the various groups, circles or divisions outside of which a mancannot marry. In case of any doubt about this rule, a clarification had been

provided to the enumerators as follows:

For instance a RashiBrahman could marry outside of the sub-caste Rashi

but he could marry outside of the larger groupBrahmanand this larger group

was what was recorded as his caste where this rule was doubtful. In case of

provincial or local designation such as Bengali, Uriya and Gorkhali, the name

of caste was entered like Bengali-Kaibartta, Uriya-Khandhit. In the case of

Musalmans and Christians the statement regarding their race or caste was

accepted as given by the respondent (Srivastava, 1972:163).

The above statement shows how a caste was renamed depending upontheir linguistic status such as Bengali, Uriya (Oriya) and Gorkhali etc.

In addition to the identification and enumeration of caste, they werealso grouped into broad homogeneous and mutually exclusive categories.While grouping the castes, the ritual hierarchy in terms of Varnawas kept inthe mind of census officials in determining caste status in social hierarchy. In

the 1881 census, the Census Commissioner, W.C. Plowden decided to groupthe various castes into the five categories, namely Brahmans, Rajputs, Castes


8/16

RAM B. BHAGAT

126

of Good Social Position, Inferior Castes and Non-Hindus or AboriginalCastes (Cohn, 1987). The 1921 census made an attempt to identify thedepressed classes. However, the term of depressed classes did not findfavour in the 1931 census and was replaced by exterior castes (Hutton,1931). In any case, it is important to note that such categorization in thecensus was followed by the Scheduled Caste Order of 1936 that officiallyrecognized the listing of castes in every province of India (Bandyopadhyay,1997: 33).

In a nutshell we find that through colonial census, caste existing at theperceived level of relationship was objectified, entered into the official

document and their social and geographical boundaries were well identifiedthrough enumeration. The enumeration of castes and their ethnographicdescriptions also highlighted how the social and economic advantagesaccrued to some castes and not to others, which led to demands from manycastes for special recognition by the state in order to receive educational andoccupational benefits as well as political representation. It generated newconsciousness among caste groups, and the democratic process inpostcolonial India brought them into the political arena of electoral politics.

3. CENSUS AND CASTE: THE POST-INDEPENDENCE PRACTICE

3.1 Scheduled category and religious identity

In independent India, Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes(STs) were accepted as new official social categories under the provision ofarticle 341 of the Indian Constitution. According to this article, the Presidentof India, after consultation with the Governor of a State/Union Territory(UT), may declare castes, races or tribes or parts of or groups within castes,races of tribes as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes belonging to thatState or UT. The official listing of castes and tribes was justified on thegrounds that these social groups have remained underprivileged anddiscriminated by the higher castes. It was therefore essential for the state toprotect their interest. Accordingly, the Govt. of India as well State

Governments granted them reservation of jobs and other benefits andprivileges. It is believed that the state granting privileges to the SCs and STs

has strengthened caste identities. On the other hand, democratic politicsbased on number gave them a new lease on life, as they constitute nearlyone-fourth of Indias population (Randeria, 2001).

In order to assess the progress and achievement of Government policiesin raising the socio-economic status of SCs and STs, it was essential for the


9/16


127

census to collect data on their demographic and socio-economic conditions.But the Govt. did not allow the census to enumerate all castes and sub-castesas practiced in British India.

Table 2 Caste/Tribe Categories in Indian censuses, 1951 to 2001

Census Caste and related categories Remark

1951 Special Group

i) Special groups are Scheduled Castes andScheduled Tribes as per the ConstitutionOrder 1950 and 1951.

ii) Scheduled Caste could belong to only Hinduor Sikh religion

iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion

1961Scheduled Caste andScheduled Tribe

i) List of the caste and tribes belonging to thisgroup as declared by the President of India


iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion1971 to




iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion

1991Scheduled Caste and

Scheduled Tribe


ii) Scheduled Caste could belong to only Hindu,Sikh and Buddhist religioniii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religion



ii) Scheduled Caste could belong to only Hindu,Sikh and Buddhist religion

iii) Scheduled Tribe could belong to any religionSources: Srivastava S.C., 1972, pp. 161-164; Census of India, 1991;

http:// www.censusindia.net

Perhaps the Government was wary of the resurgence of more than40006 caste and sub-caste identities demolishing the secular and democratic

foundation of independent India, and has ceased the enumeration of caste

6The number of castes identified in the 1901 census was 1646, which increased to 4147 in the1931 census the last census on caste in India. However, the total number of castes alsoincludes over 300 castes whose religion was recorded as Christian and over 500 who were

recorded as Muslims. The Anthropological Survey of India launched the Peoples of India

Project (under the leadership of K.S. Singh), which was completed in the 1990s. According tothis study there were 4635 castes or communities in India (Mazumdar et al., n.d.).


10/16

RAM B. BHAGAT

128

since the 1951 census except the enumeration of scheduled castes andscheduled tribes.

While the British legacy of caste enumeration was discontinued in thecensus, religious classification and their enumeration continued to be themajor preoccupation of Indian censuses even after the disappearance ofcolonialism. In the neighbouring countries of Pakistan and Bangladesh also,census continued to classify the population according to religion. In theBangladesh census, religious categories include Islam, Hindu, Buddhist,

Christian and Others, and no caste categories were identified among HinduPopulations (Bangladesh Census Bureau, 1993). In the Pakistani census,

religious categories like Muslims, Christians, Hindus (Jati), ScheduledCaste, Qadiani and Others are provided. Hindus (non-SCs) and SCs areenumerated separately, and a religious sect named Qadiani (a Muslim sect)is also enumerated (Pakistan Census Organization, 1998).

It is thus startling to find that the religious classification of thepopulation in South Asian countries is in marked contrast to the censuspractices in Southeast Asian countries, where religious identity graduallydisappeared as a primary census classification in the post colonial period. Onthe other hand, the racial and ethnic categories like Malaysian, Chinese,Javanese, Indian and Other acquired a more prominent place in the censusclassification (Anderson, 1991: 164-165).

In the censuses of independent India, religion is justified for inclusion

on the grounds that the official categorization of SCs is crucially linked withthe religious status of a person (see Table 2). At present as per Presidentialorder only Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhist can be enumerated as a SC. It is

worthwhile to mention that notwithstanding the governments constitutionalcommitment to secular principles, religion is not only enumerated, but

paradoxically only selective demographic data on the size and growth ofreligious populations

7 were published until the 2001 census. This created

enough misconception about the role of religion in population growth andconsequently fed into the charged communal situation in the country(Bhagat, 2001).

Furthermore, the freedom to profess religion is also restricted in thecase of SCs. This is evident when during census enumeration only those SCs

belonging to the religion of Hinduism, Sikh and Buddhism are recognised(see Table 2). The recognition of SCs based on religious identity is premisedon the belief that caste subjugation is ingrained in the practice of somereligions, while not in others. This has led to the denial of SC status to the

7Census published data by religion pertaining to the size, growth and also fertility levels, but

the level of education or occupational characteristics of religious groups were not publisheduntil the 2001 census (Bhagat, 2001).


11/16


129

low caste converts who embraced Christianity8, Islam, and other religions in

the past. It is possible that, if SCs are recognized across all religious groups,this is likely to weaken religious identity in the country. It seems that theIndian state is inherently disposed to the religious construction throughcensus and wherever this is being disrupted by the resurgence of casteidentities, the state can choose to thwart and mould its citizen along religiouslines. This was evident on the eve of the 2001 census.

Before the 2001 Census began, there was an argument to include

enumeration of all castes in the census. This was deemed necessary in orderto reserve jobs granted to the Other Backward Classes (OBCs) also in the

early 1990s on the recommendation of the Mandal Commision, whichfurther suggested monitoring the progress of OBCs after 20 years (Ramaiah1992). As a result, census information on OBCs similar to that of the SCsand STs was also required. But, this argument was not favoured by theCentral Government and the proposal to enumerate all castes was turneddown by the Ministry of Home Affairs, which controls the censusorganisation (Krishnakumar, 2000).

While it is true that enumeration of all castes would be difficult due tothe complexities in classifying them and due to the fact that castesthemselves have changed in several traditional attributes over time, however,in the absence of recent data, the 1931 census information on castescontinues to be the only source on the size and proportion of OBCs in the

country. Also, the state has established the National Commission forBackward Classes, under the National Commission for Backward ClassesAct 1993, which is entrusted with the task of revising the Backward Classes

list periodically for the deletion of castes that have ceased to be backwardclasses or for inclusion of new castes in the list of backward classes. For this

purpose, the Commission requires the population size of such castes, theirproportion in the district and state populations. This creates an extremenecessity for caste census in the country. But, whether caste will be includedor not is a contentious issue among academia and administrators. However,the fate of caste in census will be decided by those who hold power in thefuture (Vijayanunni, 1999).

Thus, we find that in independent India religion combined with official

categories of SCs and STs gives eight broad categories of ethnicclassification, namely: Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhists,SCs and STs. According to the census, an individual who does not fall in any

8Recently the Social Justice Minister, Government of India, has clarified in the Lok Sabha,

quoting the Registrar General of India, that any move to include Christians among the SCs

would infer that India will be imposing the caste system among Christians (Times of India,National Daily, December 20, 2003).


12/16

RAM B. BHAGAT

130

of the eight categories has an opportunity to be enumerated in the categorycalled Other. It seems that modern India has embarked upon the project ofcreating broader, more homogeneous communities in contrast to the Britishpractice of revealing enormous differentiations and differences.

3.2 Enumeration dilemmas

The enumeration of SCs and STs in the census is done strictly

according to the list supplied to the enumerators. The list varies from oneState/UT to another. If a person claims to be a SC or ST, but his or her caste

or tribe name does not figure in the list, he or she will not be recorded as aSC and ST as per census instructions (Census of India, 1971). The list istreated as sacrosanct and there is no role of how communities perceivethemselves. However, before the 1971 census, enumerators were alsosupplied with a set of synonyms, local and generic names so that a personreporting his caste or tribe by any synonym or generic name was treated asSC or ST irrespective of whether such synonym or generic name found aplace in the notified list. This practice of enumerating SCs and STs wasdiscontinued following a Supreme Court judgment. As a result, theenumerators were instructed to strictly follow the list supplied to them by thecensus.

It is a well known fact that the names of castes vary widely depending

on the dialect and language spoken in the area. Even in a homogenouslinguistic area, there is a possibility of variation in the way the name of acaste is pronounced and written. The official construction of SC or ST

ignores this important fact. On the other hand, it warrants that SC and STcommunities should know the official names of their castes or tribal

denominations and report them accordingly. As such, the officialstandardization of caste names provides a new symbol under which to unitethe splinter groups of a caste known by different local variants and withdiffering cultural practices so that they come under one official caste namegiven by the state.

SCs mostly belong to the lowest social rung of caste hierarchy knownas Shudraswith whom inter-dining was not permitted historically and who

were not allowed to worship in Hindu temples in the past. Also, the membersof higher castes usually kept a distance from them in day-to-day activities. Inorder to boost their morale, Mahatma Gandhi, the Father of the Nation,called themHarijan(people of God). It is worthwhile to mention that a clearinstruction to the enumerators is given that they should not write the termHarijanor Achhut (an untouchable) even if a person reports this at the

time of census (Census of India, 1991).


13/16


131

It is beyond doubt that the majority of the SCs and STs are still poorand that they work as landless agricultural labourers in rural areas.According to the 2001 census, the percentage of landless agriculturallabourers was nearly double compared to the non-scheduled caste population(Census of India, 2001). Being poor they often have to migrate to urbanareas in search of employment. However, the migration of SCs and STs notonly makes enumeration difficult but also forfeits their scheduled status ifthey migrate to states of India other than their state of origin. This is due to

the fact that the list of SCs and STs is applicable only in the state wherethese communities traditionally live. Thus we find that in the 2001 census

even a former President of India was not counted as SC because he hadmigrated from the state of Kerala to the National Capital Territory of Delhi(Pinto, 2001). This is because the list of SCs pertaining to the NationalCapital Territory of Delhi did not contain the name of the caste to which theformer President belonged. This raised an important issue about the waycensus counted SCs and STs, and points to a paradox of state grantingprivileges to uplift them on the one hand, and dissolving their special statuson the other through the instrument of census enumeration.

4. CONCLUSION

It may be wrong to assume that caste has been a static category ofIndian society. It has changed due to internal as well as external forcesunleashed by the state power. Census is one such process which tried toprovide neat boundaries among the castes through classification. Censusduring the British period officially demarcated the caste grids, providedfixed labels, and grouped them anchored to time and space. In this process,caste categories were officially standardized, necessitated by the exigenciesof enumeration which renewed their identity by providing information ongeographical coverage and demographic strength, and encouraged them tothe democratic politics of mobilization based on new forms of castecategories and consciousness.

In independent India, census is not comfortable with caste enumeration.

It has discontinued the British practice, but retained the enumeration ofhistorically deprived and discriminated castes. The demand for a complete

caste enumeration, following the Indian Government granting jobreservations to OBCs in the early 1990s and consequently the need for socio-demographic information for identifying OBCs, has not been acceded to bythe State. In India, from the point of view of access to state power, caste andreligion have been two competing identities in the political sphere. Whether


14/16

RAM B. BHAGAT

132

caste will be incorporated in the census much depends upon its trade off withreligion in the processes of political mobilization. The different politicalparties in India have been changing their strategies accordingly. But, the factremains that if caste identity finds precedence it is likely to weaken religiousidentity. A full-scale caste census contains this potential. It is thereforeobserved that

if caste returns as a critical enumerative category for the Indian state in the

new millennium, it both carries the enormous contradictions of this legacy

and points to new possibilities for social transformation and political

citizenship. Caste, in these terms, is neither tragedy nor farce, but history

itself (Dirks, 2001:302).

References

AHMED R. (1981), The Bengal Muslims 1871-1906: A Quest for Identity,Delhi, Oxford University Press, Delhi.

AREL D. (2002),Demography and politics in the first post-Soviet censuses:mistrusted state, contested identities,Population-E, 57(6), 801-828.

ANDERSON B.(1991),Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin andSpread of Nationalism, Revised Edition, London, Verso.

APPADURAI A. (1993), Number in the colonial imagination, in VAN DER

VEER P., BRECKENRIDGE C. (eds.), Orientalism and the Post-colonialPredicament, Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 314-339.

BAINES U.A. (1893), Census of India 1891: A General Report, London, IndiaOffice, (Reprinted by Manas Publications, 1985, Delhi).

BANDYOPADHYAY, S. (1992), Construction of social categories: the role ofthe colonial census, in SINGH K.S. (ed.), Ethnicity, Caste and People,Proceedings of the Indo-Soviet Seminars Held in Calcutta andLeningrad in 1990, Organised by Anthropological Survey of India, NewDelhi and Institute of Ethnography, Moscow, Manohar, Delhi, 26-36.

BANDYOPADHYAYS. (1997), Caste, Protest and Identity in Colonial India:The Namasudras of Bengal, 1872-1097, London, Curzon Press.

BANGLADESH CENSUS BUREAU OF STATISTICS (1993), BangladeshPopulation Census 1991, Vol. 2, Union Statistics, December, 1-11,http://www.bbsgov.org/ana_vol.2 accessed on August 18, 2005.

BHAGAT R.B. (2001), Census and the construction of communalism inIndia,Economic and Political Weekly, November, 4352-4355.

BHAGAT R.B. (2003), Role of census in racial and ethnic construction: US,British and Indian censuses,Economic and Political Weekly, February22, 686-691.


15/16


133

CENSUS OF INDIA (1971), Special Tables for Scheduled Castes, Series 1,India, Part V-A (I), New Delhi, Registrar General and CensusCommissioner.

CENSUS OF INDIA (1991), Primary Census Abstracts: Scheduled Castes,Series 1, India, Part II-B (ii), New Delhi, Registrar General and CensusCommissioner.

CENSUS OF INDIA (2001), Primary Census Abstract,Data Product No: 00-73-2001-Cen-CD, New Delhi, Office of the Registrar General, India.

COHN B. (1987), The census, social structure and objectification in SouthAsia, in COHN B. (ed.), An Anthropologist Among the Historians and

Other Essays, Delhi, Oxford University Press, 224-254.DAS A.N (1994), India Invented: A Nation in the Making, New Delhi,

Manohar.DESHPANDE S., SUNDER N. (1998), Caste and census: Implications for

society and the social sciences, Economic and Political Weekly,August 8, 2157-2159.

DIRKS N.B.(2001), Castes of Mind: Colonialism and the Making of ModernIndia, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 302.

GAIT E.A. (1913), Census of India, 1911, Vol. 1, India, Part I-Report,Superintendent Calcutta, Government Printing, India.

GUHA S. (2003), The politics of identity and enumeration in India C. 1600-1990, Comparative Study of Sociology and History, 45(1), 148-167.

GHURYE G.S. (1924), The Caste and Class in India, Bombay, Popular BookDepot.HUTTON J.H. (1931), Census of India 1931, Vol. 1, New Delhi, Reprinted by

Gyan Publishing House, 1996, 419-502.GUPTA D. (2004), Introduction the certitude of caste: When identity

trumps hierarchy, Contributions to Indian Sociology, 38(1&2), v-xv.JONES K.W. (1981), Religious identity and Indian census, in BARRIER N.G.

(ed.), The Census in British India: New Perspectives, New Delhi,Manohar.

KAVIRAJ S (1993), The imaginary institution of India, in CHATTERJEE P.,PANDEY G. (eds.), Subaltern Studies VII, Delhi, Oxford UniversityPress.

KERTZER D.I., AREL D. (2002), Census and Identity: The Politics of Race,Ethnicity and Language in National Censuses, Cambridge, CambridgeUniversity Press.

KRISHNAKUMAR A. (2000), Caste and the census,Frontline, 17(18), 2-15.LERIDON H. (1999), The ethnic variable as a statistical category,

Population: An English Selection, 11, 189-192.


16/16

RAM B. BHAGAT

134

MASSEY D.S. (1995), The new immigration and ethnicity in the UnitedStates,Population and Development Review, 21(3), 631-652.

MAZUMDAR V. (n.d.),Human Rights and Human Development in India, NewDelhi Centre for Womens Development Studies.

NOBLES M. (2000), Shades of Citizenship: Race and the Census in ModernPolitics, Standford, Standford University Press, CA.

PADMANABHA P. (1978),Indian Census and Anthropological Investigations,New Delhi, Registrar General, India (Paper prepared for X International

Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences held in NewDelhi 1978).

PAKISTAN CENSUS ORGANISATION(1998), Census Report of Pakistan 1998,Govt. of Pakistan, (downloaded from website of Population Associationof Pakistan, Islamabad.http://www.pap.org.pk/statistics/population.htm accessed on August 20,2005.

PEACH C. (2000) Discovering white ethnicity and parachuted plurality,Progress in Human Geography, 24(4), 620-626.

PINTO A. (1998), Should caste be included in the census, Economic andPolitical Weekly, August 1, 2058-2060.

PINTO A. (2001), The great forgery,Mainstream, March, 15-16.PREWITT K. (2001), The US decennial census: Political questions, scientific

answers,Population and Development Review, 26(1), 1-16.

RAMAIAH A. (1992), Identifying the Other Backward Classes, Economicand Political Weekly, June 6, 1203-1207.RANDERIA S. (2001), Nation-State, Democracy and Development in India

(1947-99), Coimbra, Centro de Estudos Sociais.SHETH D.L. (1999), Secularisation of caste and making of new middle

class, Economic and Political Weekly, August 21-28, (SpecialArticles).

SRIVASTAVA S.C. (1972), Indian Census in Perspective, Census CentenaryMonograph No 1, New Delhi, Office of the Registrar General, India.

UPADHYA C. (1997), Social and cultural strategies of class formation incoastal Andhra Pradesh, Contributions to Indian Sociology, 31(2),169-194.

VIJYANUNNI M. (1999), Re-introduce the caste questions in 2001 Census,Demography India, 28, 273-277.

Census and Caste Enumeration

Documents

Transcript of Census and Caste Enumeration