Social Stratification among Kashmiri Muslims. A Study Of District Pulwama

Contents

1.1 Introduction
1.2 Conceptual Framework
1.3 System’S Of Stratification
1.3.1 Slavery
1.3.2 Estate
1.3.3 Caste System
1.4 Theoretical Framework
1.4.1 The Natural Superiority Theory
- Karl Marx
- Ralph Dahrendorf
- Criticism
- Emile Durkheim
- Talcott Parson
- Kingsley Davis And Wilbert Moore
- Tumin; A Critical Response
1.5 Social Stratification; Indian Perspective
1.5.1 Relevance Of Theories
1.5.2 Social Stratification In Kashmir
1.6 The Study
1.6.1 Hypothesis
1.6.2 Objectives
1.6.3 Universe &Amp; Sample Of The Study
1.6.4 Sample Of The Study
1.7 District Pulwama
1.7.1 Religious
1.7.2 Education
1.7.3 Economy
1.7.4 Tools And Techniques
1.7.5 The Collection Of Data
1.8 Findings
1.8.1 Caste Stratification
1.8.2 Class Stratification
1.8.3 Power Stratification
1.8.4 Changes Of Social Stratification
1.9 Conclusion
1.10 Bibliography

Acknowledgement

Infinite Thanks Are There For Almighty Allah, Who Endowed Me With The Power Of Mind. In Compilation The Present Dissertation I Want To Register My Profound Gratitude To My Worthy Supervisor, Dr. Salima Jan , Research Scientist Emmrc (Presently Director Of Emmrc), Whose Generous Guidance, Valuable Suggestions Helped Me To Overcome All The Hurdles In The Process Of Research. I Take This Opportunity Of Expressing My Sense Of Gratitude To Dr. Aneesa Shafi (Head Of The Department Of Sociology) And Other Faculty Members Of The Department For Their Sincere Advice And Help Especially To Late Dr. Bashir Ahmad Dabla .

In Writing This Dissertation, I Have Earned My Debts. My Greatest Debt Is To My Family Members Particularly To My Mother ‘ Aasha Wani ’. I Am Equally Thankful To My Elder Brother Mr. Gh. Mohi-Ud-Din , As He Providing One Constant Encouragement Throughout My Career.

I Also Register My Special Thanks To All Of My Departmental Colleagues. I Am Also Grateful To All The Respondents Of District Pulwama, Who Provided Me Valuable Information.

I Shall Be Failed In My Duties If I Would Not Register My Thanks To My Friends, Who Not Only Provided Me Moral Boost But Equally Shared My Problems, Especially, Roohiya Wani.

Irshad Ahmad Wani

1.1 Introduction

If We Endeavour To Transgress The Ambits Of Time And Look Retrospectively Back On The History Of Human Civilization, Our Sight Will Never Miss The Fragrant Truth That The History Of Social Stratification Is Of The Same Age As Human Civilization. The History Of Social Stratification Can Be Traced Back To The Times When Human Switched Their Interest From Fishing Or Hunting To Sedentary Agricultural Societies With A Surplus Economy, A Variety Of Occupations Developed That Were Essential To The Proper Functioning Of That Society¹. Inevitably, These Functions Began To Be Ranked Hierarchically, Usually Based On The Amount Of Preparation And Training Needed Or The Importance Of That Occupation To A Particular Society.

A Harvest Of Factors/Variables Responsible For Social Stratification Has Been Upheld By Sociologist, And Social Anthropologists. The Views Vary According To The Prevailing Social Conditions And General Outlook And Observation Of The Sociologists Of Different Times. One Of The Views Which Explain The Cause Of Social Stratification Is That At Times Humans Themselves Are Responsible For Their Fate. Rousseau Says, All Men May Born Equal But Some Are Born More Equal But Some Are Born More Equal Than Others, Because They Are Born Into Families Whose Members Think, Speak, And Act Differently And These Thoughts, Words, And Deeds Are More Important To The Society ². Most People Of Course, Are Aware Of The Fact That Some Are Rich While Some Others Are Poor. But People In General Are Usually Less Aware Of The Systematic Social Forces To Think That People Themselves Are Responsible For Their Lot In Life. Sociologists Have Argued That There Are Varying Factors For Determining The Nature Of Stratification In The Human Society.

In Actuality, The Basis Of Deprivation Varies From Society To Society And From Place To Place.

Again This Fact Is Endorsed By Christian And Hindu Scriptures As Well.

In Christianity, The Social Problems Of Inequality, Poverty, And Other Miseries Are Attributed To The Original Sin Of Disobedience Of Man To God³. The Doctrine Of Karma And Dharma In Hinduism Refers To The Cycle Of Rebirths A Person Has To Undergo. A Person’S Situation In The Present Life Is Regarded As The One Determined By His Action In The Past Life. The Remedy To A Person’S Low Situation In The Present Life In Doing His Duty Well So That He Will Born To A Higher Position In The Next Life⁴. These Views Were Upheld By Social Thinkers When The Human Society Was In The Theological/ Metaphysical Stage.

Social Inequality Can Be Attributed To Relative Possession Or Non-Possession Of Some Characteristics Such As Wealth, Income Or Status, Which Becomes The Distributing Principle For Individuals Within The System Of Unequal Rewards. Different Societies Use Various Organized Principles For Slotting Individuals Into The Hierarchy. Traditional Societies Have Often Hereditary Characteristics As The Basis For Distribution, While More Modern Societies Often Use Wealth Or Income. The Importance Of Stratification Is That Those At The Top Of The System Have Greater Access To Scarce Resources Than Those At The Bottom⁵. However, More Complicated The Society, And More Differentiated The Individuals Become. It Was Believed By Some That Once The Industrial Revolution Will Occur, It Will Eliminate Social Inequality Or At Least Minimize It. Now, When Societies Got Industrialized, The Differentiation Could Not Be Avoided. In Feudal Societies, Ownership Of Land Was Considered As The Basis Of Deprivation. Again In Capitalist Society, It Is The Relation Of Human Beings With The Mode Of Production That Differentiated Them⁶.

Thus, Summing Up The Whole It Can Be Stated That Social Stratification Is A Universal-Societal Phenomenon. What Are Particular About It, Are Its Specific Manifestations And Ramifications Depending On The Particular Type Of Combination Of Factors Such As The Nature Of The Political System, Historical Development, Social Organisation, Occupational Structure, Technological Development, Advancement, Economic Development, Value System, And The Demographic Composition⁷. All These Factors Severally And Collectively Undergo, Bringing About Changes In The Stratification System. Thus, The Systems Of Stratification Vary In Their Forms And Types, Not Only Stratification Varies From One Period To Another Period In The Same Society, But At The Same Time May Be Space Bound And Time Bound.

1.2 Conceptual Framework

Most People Would Agree That Few Societies Are Really Equal. Ideally We Want To Believe As Thomas Jefferson Wrote In The Declaration Of Independence We Hold These Truths To Be Self-Evident, That All Men Are Created Equal’’. But In The Real World That Is Not Always The Case Because Some Individuals Have Greater Access To The Scarce Resources Of Society. Society Is Thus Built Upon The Relationships Between The Various Unequal Parts⁸. So, We Know That Societies Have The Internal Inequality Which May Be Termed As Social Stratification.

The Study Of Social Stratification Is Of Central Concern To Sociologists Because Modern Societies Display Such A Wide Range Of Inequalities. These Include Inequalities Between Rich And Poor, Between Social Classes, Between Men And Women, And Between Black And White. Inequalities In Wide Range In Almost Every Area Of Social Life, Such As In Job Security, Leisure Opportunities, Health, Housing, Income And The Power To Influence Events In Society⁹.

The Word Stratification Is Basically A Geological Word, Which Means Different Layers Which Some Rocks Are Having¹⁰. Borrowed By Analogy From The Earths Sciences, The Term Social Stratification Has Come Into General Sociological Use Only Since About 1940 To Denote Exactly The Same Type Of Layers Of The Society¹¹. Thus, The Term Social Stratification Refers To The Existence Of Different Layers, Which Are Created On The Basis Of Unequal Positions Occupied By The Members In A Society, The Unequal Distribution Of Wealth, Power And Prestige Provides The Basis For The Creation Of Different Layers Or Strata In A Society. The Members Of Stratum Generally Have A Common Awareness, Identity, Life Styles And Chances¹².

Social Stratification Deals With The Ways In Which Human Population Is Socially Differentiated I.E., Differentiated Publicly And Demonstrably. The Criteria For Differentiation May Be One But The Social Display Of Differentiation Usually Include A Host Of Factors, Including, Race, Religion, Family, Lineage, Kind And Amount Of Property Or Income, Occupation, Or Some Other Characteristics. Thus, The Process By Which Individuals And Groups Are Ranked In A More Or Less Enduring Hierarchy Of Status Is Known As Social Stratification¹³.

From The Very Beginning, Sociologists Have Tried To Seek The Roots, Origin And Rationales Of The Phenomenon. In Fact, Controversies Are The Natural Outcome Of The Search For The Higher Orders Of Explanations And Inclusive System Of Classification Of This Phenomenon. The Differencing Value Systems, Perception Of Social Orders, Equality And Justice Have Led Them, To Provide Different Explanation. The Distinction Made Between Social Inequality And Natural Inequality Puzzled The Analysists. Rousseau Made First Distinctions Between The Two And Argued That The First One Is Established By Nature And Consists Of Difference In Age, Health, Bodily Strength, And The Qualities Of Mind Or The Soul. Similarly, Social Based Inequality According To Him Consists Of The Different Privileges Which Some Men Enjoy, To The Prejudice Of Others Such As, That Of Being More Rich, More Honored, More Powerful, Or Even In A Position To Concrete Obedience¹⁴.

1.3 Systems Of Social Stratification

Social Stratification / Social Inequalities Exist In All Types Of Human Societies. Even The Simplest Cultures, Were Variations In Wealth Or Property Are Virtually Non-Existent, There Are Inequalities Between Individuals, Men And Women, The Young And Old. A Person May Have A Higher Status Than Others, Because Of, Particular Prowess At Hunting, Or Because He /She Have Special Access To The Ancestral Spirits. To Describe Inequalities, Sociologists Speak Social Stratification. Stratification Can Be Defined As Structured Inequalities Between Different Groupings Of People¹⁵.

The Systems Of Stratification Exhibit Wide Variance In Different Societies Of The World. This Variation May Be In The Criteria, Utilized For Placing Individuals And Groups In Various Social Strata Of The System, Or In The Number Of Strata In The System, And With Some Having Two Broad Strata Such As, Feudal Lords And Serfs, Or Nobility And Commoners And Other’S Having More. They May Further Vary In Rigidity Or Flexibility And The Sharpness With Which Each Stratum Are Demarcated. In Some Systems Different Strata Are Easily Identifiable, While In Others The Boundaries Are Hard To Locate. Considering The Various Societies That Have Existed And Do Exist In The World, Certain Recurrent Forms Of Social Stratification Generally Can Be Identified. Sociologists Have Identified Four Major Types Or Stratification System, Which Have Different Differences Between Them, ‘The Slavery System, The Feudal Estates, The Caste And The Class System. These Types Or Forms Are Briefly Described Below;

1.3.1 Slavery

Slavery Is One Of The Oldest And Most Resilient Systems Of Stratification. It Was Strongly Associated Within Early Agrarian Civilization, Including Greece And Rome For Centuries It Flourished To The Other Parts Of The World¹⁶.

Slavery Has Been Found In Societies As Diverse As Classic Athens And Eighteenth-Century America. Slavery Is An Extreme Form Of Inequality In Which Some Individual Are Owned By Their Masters. Such Ownership Might Arise By Purchasing Or By Capture In War¹⁷. Although, Slaves Are Working At The Most Menial And Exhausting Occupations, As With Plantations Of The ‘ Caribbean ’ Or What Is Now The United States Of America Or The Mines Of South America. Slaves In Ancient Societies Could Occupy Quite Senior Positions As Administrations. However, The Lives Of Slaves Were Clearly Limited By The Fact That They Were Owned. Some Were Freed By Their Masters Or Escaped, But, Generally Slave Societies Were Very Rigid.

Slavery Has Frequently Provoked Resistance And Struggle For Those Subject To It. History Is Punctuated With Slave Rebellions, So That, They Can Free Themselves From Their Masters System Of Forced Labour. Since Freedom Was Granted To Slaves In The Developed Countries Over A Century Ago, Slavery As A Feudal Institution Has Been Gradually Eradicated, And Today Has Almost Completely Disappeared From The World¹⁸. But It Is Possible To Argue That The Modern World Has The Remnants Of Slavery In The Use Of Forced Labour In Some Societies.

1.3.2 Estate

The Estate System Was A Social Hierarchy Centered On The Monopoly Of Power And Ownership Of Land By A Group Of Victorious Warriors (Lords), Who Were Entitled To Labour Goods And Military Service From Peasants - The Vast Majority Of The Agrarian Population.

‘‘ Estate ’’ (German - Stande) Is Social Strata Whose Position Is Defined By Law Or Custom¹⁹. Estates Occurred In Federal Europe And In China And Japan, Feudalism Of The Estate System, Or The War Born Of The Violent Dissolution Of The Roman Empire Initially²⁰.

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

Estate System Of Stratification Looks Like The Above Diagram

In Estate System, The Person’S Social Position Depends Upon His Relationship To An Agricultural Economy. There Were No Legal Equality Between Estates, And People In Higher Estates Had More Legal Rights And Privileges Than Those In Lower Ones. The Lower-Strata Had Duties And Obligations To Those Higher In The Hierarchy. Membership Of Any Estate Was Determined Largely By Birth, With Social Position, Power And Status All Ascribed At Birth²¹.

From The Above Diagram, The Aristocracy Comprised Of The First Estate And Was Headed By The King Or Emperor. The Second Estate Was Made Up Of The Clergy In Europe And The Samurai In Japan. Commoners Constituted The Third Estate, And In Japan, There Was A Fourth Estate Of Out-Castes²². The System Worked As A Series Of Rights And Duties Owned By Estate To Each Other. In Feudal Europe, It Was To Some Extent Supported By Religious Beliefs Which Asserted The Divine Right Of Kings. Remnants Of Estates System Persists In Britain In The Prestige That Continues To Be Given To The Monarchy And The Aristocracy And The Defense That Is Shown To Titles Of All Kinds.

1.3.3 Caste System

Systems Of Stratification Based On Caste Are Typically Found In Modern Indian Sub-Continent. Position In The Caste System Is Based On Birth And It Is Therefore, Not Possible To Change One’S Caste. The Relationships Between Castes Are Expressed In Terms Of Honour And Prestige Supported By Codes Of Behavior And By The Hindu Religion. In Particular, There Are Strong Taboos That Prevent Mixing Between The Castes²³. Castes - Like Systems Have Been Found Elsewhere In The World. This Is Particularly True Where Racial Or Ethnic Distinctions Are Involved E.G., In The Southern States Of U.S.A, Or In South Africa, Until Recently Blacks And Whites Were Segregated From Each By Legal Measures, By Customs Or By Taboos Such As Disgust At Intermarriage.

In Caste System, People Believe The Social Position They Are Born Into (Their Caste) Is God Given. They Generally Accept The Ascribed Caste-Position. The Purity Of Each Caste Is Maintained By Endogamy.

In The Indian Caste System, The Hindu Religion Divides The Population Into Five Major Castes;

1. Brahman:- The Highest Caste Of Priests And Religions People
2. Kshatriyas :- Rulers And Administrators
3. Vaishas :- Merchants And Farmers
4. Shudra : - Manual Labours
5. The Untouchables : - Literally, A Group Without A Caste, Social Out Castes^[24].

Traces Of Slavery And Of The Estates Are Characteristic Of Aristocratic Societies Persist In Modern Times. Caste Continuous To Inform Daily Life In India, But Its Significance Is Waning Under The Impact Of Economic Changes And Attempts To Legislate Against It. The Contemporary World Is However Dominated By A Fourth Kind Of Stratification System I.E. Social Class²⁵.

All Systems Of Stratification Are Founded In The Interrelationships Between Money, Power And Prestige. High Strata Have More Of All These Attributes, Although In Different Systems, Different Elements Have Relatively More Importance. Prestige And Honour Are Particularly Significant In Caste System, Power In Slavery²⁶. In Addition, All Systems Of Stratification Have In Effect; To Regulate Inter-Relationships Between Strata. Caste, Slavery, And Estate Systems Are Underpinned By Law, Force And Religion. Social Contact Especially, Marriage Is Prevented By Custom And Taboo And Position Of An Individual Is Determined By Birth. The Result Is That These Systems Are Fairly Rigid And Do Not Allow Any Mobility, From One Stratum To Another. Systems Based On Social Class On The Other Hand, Do Not Erect Such Firm Barriers Between Strata. They Depend Furthermore, On Economic Differences Between Groups Of Individuals. The Class Stratification Has Been Explained In The Second Chapter.

1.4 Theorectical Frammework

Social Stratification Is One Of The Oldest And Most Researched Areas Of Sociology. The Social Stratification Antedates The Christian Calendar By More Than A Millennium Certainly, Probably By Much More. The Idea Of Social Stratification Is Found In The Judeo-Christian Bible , The Social Thought Of The Greeks, And The Basic Social And Religious Texts Of ‘ The Indians And The Chinese ’. The Idea Has Persisted In Relatively Crude Form, Right Up To The Present Day²⁷.

The Social Stratification Was Prevalent In All Societies That Over The Centuries Its Existence Was Seldom Questioned. It Was Accepted As Part Of The Natural Order. Religion Was Used To Support Stratification E.G., With The Head Of State Often Being Considered Divinely. In The Eighteenth Century, However, The America And The French Revolutions, With Their Emphasis On Human Rights And Their Call For Equality, Changed The Accepted Way Of Thinking²⁸. Efforts Were Made Both To Understand The Reasons For Social Inequality, And To Seek Means Of Lessen Its Negative Effects.

Since The Second Half Of The 19th Century, Four Broad Sociological Theories Have Been Used To Explain And Interpret Social Stratification, The Natural Superiority Theory, The Marxist Conflict Theory, The Weberian Multiple-Hierarchies Theory And The Functionalist Theory.

Social Stratification Is Probably As Old As The Human Civilization. The Systematic Thought, Regarding Society And Social Stratification Originated With Two Great Masters Of Greek Society Plato And Aristotle Who Came From Upper Strata Of The Society. The Society Envisioned By Plato Was To Be Ruled By Philosopher Kings With The Remaining Citizens Divided Into Three Classes; The Guardian, Auxiliary And Workers . Aristotle In His Book ‘ Polities ’ Said That There Were Three Classes In All State Viz, Very Rich, Very Poor And The Mean. St. Thomas And St. Augustine Were Concerned With Understanding Why Human Society Everywhere Seemed To Be Characterized By Such Distinct And Sharp Gradations In Power, Property, And Prestige, And Attempted To Set Forth The Proper Mode Of Arranging, Men In Hierarchical Order. Later, Philosopher’S Including Locke, Burke, And Boudham In Germany, Rousseau In France And Hegel In Germany, Were All Aware Of The Phenomenon Presented By Social Strata Based On Inherent And/Or Acquired Differences, And Each Had His Own Notion Of Who Should Govern²⁹.

Though These Philosophers’S Could Not Provide A Scientific Understanding Of This Phenomenon But Their Ideas Prepared The Background Of The Sociologists For Further Investigation. The Main Problem Of The Ancient Theories Of Social Stratification Was That It Has Not Been Empirically Verifiable And Observable. As The Time Went On, New Scientific Ideas Were Developed In Order To Understand And Interpret These Phenomenons³⁰.

By The Turn Of The 19th Century, Oligarchies And Aristocratic Rules Were Challenged By Popular Revolution And It Began To Crumble. Industrialization And Urbanization Ushered In Forces Which Gave Rise To New Classes Based On Power And Wealth.

1.4.1 The Natural Superiority Theory By Darwin

The Natural Superiority Theory Also Known As Social Darwinism Was A Popular And Widely Accepted Theory Of Social Stratification In The Late 19th And Early 20th Centuries, Promoted By Herbert Spencer (1820-1903) In England And William Ghram Sumner In The United States . Social Darwinism Saw Social Organization As An Environment. Certain Individuals Or Groups Had The Requisite Skills Or Attributes To Compete And To Rise In That Environment; They Would Become The Leaders And The Economically Fortunate. Others, Not So Endowed, Would Fail. The Not So-Subtle Implication Of This Idea Was That The Rich Deserved To Keep Their Great Fortunes Intact. The Poor Also Deserved To Keep Their Lot, Because It Was The Result Of Sloth, Ignorance, Or Some Other Flaw; They Deserved No Pity. The Social Darwinists Believed That Their Theory Was Part Of The Law Of Nature. Spencer Coined The Widely Quoted ‘ Survival Of The Fittest ’³¹.

Karl Marx: (1818-1883)

If Any Individual Could Be Called The Founder Of The Study Of Social Stratification It Would Karl Marx Who Saw The Conflict Between Social Classes As The Driving Force In History.

Karl Marx As An Economic Determinist Looked At Social Stratification From A New Dimension. He Saw Class As The Key To History, To Social Organization, And Social Change, And The Individual Behavior Also. Marx Was Both A Revolutionary And A Social Scientist. He Was Concerned With Stratification In All Types Of Human Societies, Beginning With Primitive Agricultural Tribes And Continuing Into Feudalism. But His Main Focus Was On The Effects Of Class On All Aspects Of 19th Century Europe³².

Karl Marx, The Father Of The Study Of Social Class, Defined Classes By Their Relationship To The Means Of Production. Thus, As Per Marx Class Differences Therefore, Are Determined By The Mode Of Production. In Marx’S View, Social Relations During Any Period Of History Depend On Who Controls The Primary Mode Of Economic Production. His Analysis Centered On How The Relationships Between Various Groups Were Shaped By Differential Access To Scare Resources. Thus, Ancient Society Was Based On Slavery, Feudal Society (Estate System) On Serfdom, And Capitalist’S Society On Wage Labour.

The Relationship Between What Marx Labeled As The Sub-Structure, And The Super- Structure Of Society Is A Key In Marxian Theory. According To Him, All Social Life Was Shaped And Determined By The Relations, People Establish Between Each Other, In The Process Of Economic Production. He Described Economy As Society’S Sub-Structure, The Institution, Which Shapes Every Other Aspect Of Human Life – Government, Family, Education, Philosophy, Religion, Art, Literature, And Much More - As ‘ Super-Structure ’ Because They Are All Influenced By The Economy (Sub-Structure)³³. Marx Also Distinguished Between The ‘ Means Of Production ’ And The ‘ Relations Of Production ’. Marx Pointed Out That Classes Are Stratified According To Their Relations To The Means Of Production. Classes Are Historical Phenomena Originated From The Division Of Labour In Society, And The Institution Of Private Property. To Him, Society Is Divided Into Two Opposite Classes - One Constituted Of Those Who Own The Means Of Production I.E. Bourgeoisie (Haves) Or Capitalists (Such As Owners Of Factories And Machinery), The Other Of Those Who Do Not Own It I.E. Proletariat - Working Class³⁴. In Capitalist Societies, The Bourgeoisie Maximizes Profit In Competition With Other Firms. In The Process, They Exploit Workers, Who Must Exchange Their Labour For Subsistence Wages.

Private Property To Marx Is The Root Cause Of The Surplus Value By The Owners Of The Means Of Production And This Creates Class Struggle. Marx Maintained That The Nature Of Class Situation Differs According To The Forces Of Production, But The Broader Character Of The Classes Remains The Same. For Example With The Change In The Forces Of Production, The Composition Of Classes Also Undergoes A Change. But With The Change In The Forces Of Production The Class Does Not Go Away Rather The Exploiting Class Of The Previous Phase Is Replaced By Another Exploiting Class. According To Karl Marx, The Weapons With Which The Bourgeois Felled Feudalism To The Ground Is Now Turned Against The Bourgeoisie Itself³⁵. The Capitalist’S Mode Of Production Is Responsible For Its Own Destruction. Because, The Capitalist System Reduces The Majority Members Into Proletariat And This Proletariat Class Through A Revolution Overthrow’S The Capitalist Class. This Class Also Abolishes Private Property In Order To Establish Classless Society.

With Proletarian Revolution, The Bases For The Class System Are Removed And The Proletariat Is Emancipated. In The Interim Between The Capitalist And The Classless Society, A Dictatorship Of The Proletariat Exists Paving The Way For A Communistic Society And The Beginning Of Truly Human Rather Than Class Society Or Class History³⁶.

Core Elements Of Marx’S Theory Of Social Stratification Within Capitalism

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

Finally, The Marxists Approach To The Study Of Class Is Useful In Stressing The Importance Of Stratification As A Determinant Of Social Behavior And The Fundamental Separation In Many Societies Between The Two Distinct Groups, The Rich And The Poor.

Ralf Dahrendorf

Ralf Dahrendorf Another Sociologist Has Also Given A Conflict Perspective Of Social Stratification. In Opposing Marx, Dahrendorf Says That Class And Class - Conflict Would Be Present Not Only In The Capitalist Societies But Also In The Post- Capitalist Societies, I.E., Class And Class-Conflict Is An Inseparable Part Of All Societies-Industrial And Post-Industrial. Dahrendorf Tried To Give A Different Explanation Of The Existing Inequalities. He Maintains The Root Cause Of Social Inequality Is More General Factor Than The Private Ownership Of The Means Of Production, Namely The Exercise Of Authority. The Private Ownership Of The Means Of Production Is But One Of The Several Modes Of Exercise Of Authority; In Fact, It Is Not So Much The Ownership Of Property Or Its Control, Which Gives One Effective Authority Over Other, And In The Modern Industrial Society, The Control Of Property Is Often Divorced From Its Ownership. As A Result Even When The Private Ownership Is Abolished, The Scope For The Exercise Of Power Does Not Disappear³⁷. According To Dahrendorf, Social Organizations Are Imperatively Coordinate Associations Rather Than Social Systems. The Authority Structure Is An Integral Part Of Every Social Organization And It Leads In Excitable To The Crystallizations Of Interest Groups And Inherent Possibilities Of Conflict.

Dahrendorf Recognizes All Kinds Of Individual Or Group Interests. There Are Interests In Obtaining More Material Rewards, Freedom, And Status Reorganization, Leisure, All Kinds Of Services From Others And So On. But The Main Point Is That The Means Of Attaining Theses Interests Are Related To Authority Positions Within Imperatively Co-Ordinate Associations. In Other Words, The Haves Get What They Want Because They Are On Top In The Associations, While The Have-Nots , Find It In Their Interests To Challenge The Status Quo That Assigns Them Low Positions And Low-Rewards³⁸.

Criticism

No Doubt Marx’S Theory Provided A New Scientific Basis For Understanding Society, But His Theory Has Been Subjected To Close Security. His Theory Of Classless Society Has Been Severely Challenged By Many Scholars On The Grounds That, Marx’S Theory Of Class, Dealing With Social Stratification Is Only By-Product Of His Analysis Of Capitalist Society, And Formulation Of The Philosophy Of History. Further The Use Of Term ‘ Class ’ By Marx Has Marked Ambiguities.

Dahrendorf Pointed Out That Whatever Private Property Has Been Reduced To Insignificance, One Still Finds Social Inequality. In The Former Communist Nations, Although There Is Little Private Property, A System Of Social Stratification Developed Nonetheless E.G. There Were Five Social Classes In Former Soviet Union; ‘ Intelligentsia ’, ‘ White-Collar Worker ’, ‘ Skilled Workers ’, ‘ Un-Skilled Rank ’, And ‘ Peasants’ . Beisanz Pointed Out, Everything Happened Differently In The U.S.S.R And Other Communist Countries From What The Leaders-Even Such Prominent One As Lenin , Stalin , And Trotsky - Anticipated. They Accepted That The State Would Rapidly Wither Away, The Democracy Would Be Strengthened. The Reverse Happened.

Webber Strongly Criticized Marxian Perspective Of Social Stratification. Webber Generally Believed That Marx Over Emphasized The Economic Factor. The Relation To The Means Of Production May Be A Major Factor Of Differentiating People, But It Can Never Be The Only Factor. Webber Maintained That There Are Always Other Factors Responsible For Social Stratification E.G. Status And Power. It Is Because People Differentiate Themselves By Their Way Of Life Status, Prestige And Position And So On.

Many Of Marx’S Prediction Regarding The Future Of Capitalism Have Not Been Borne Out. Marx Failed To Anticipate The Emergency Of Labour Unions. Whose Power In Collective Bargaining Weakens The Strangle Hold That Capitalists Maintain Over Workers. Despite These Limitations, The Marxist Approach To The Study Of Class Is Useful In Stressing The Importance Of Stratification As A Determinant Of Social Behavior And Institutions.

Dahrendorfs Theory Has Also Been Subjected To Critical Scrutiny. For Example, Dahrendorf Depended Mostly On The Secondary Literature And His Theory Is Mainly A Theory Of Group Conflict. He Himself Has Admitted, The Theory Is A Tentative One And Needs Refinement. In Order To Evaluate Dahrendorfs Theory, D’Souza Rightly Comments, As A Theory Of Stratification, Dahrendorfs Formulation Leaves Many Questions Unanswered, E.G., Is It Possible To Divided People Into Dichotomous Divisions Of Those Who Exercise Authority And Of Those Who Are Excluded From Exercising It. It Seems That The Major Limitation Of Dahrendorfs Formulation Stems From His Assumption That All Other Categories Of Sociological Analysis May Be Derived From The Unequal But Closely Related Trinity Of Norms, Sanction Power.

However, The Most Prominent Sociologist Who Has Come Out With The Most Influential Theory Till Date Has Been Max Webber. Webber’S View Has Been Considered By Most Of The Sociologists As Comprehensive And Relevant To Every Society.

The Pioneering German Sociologist Max Webber Said How The Many Layers And Rank In Capitalistic Western Societies Are Defined By People’S Skills, Credentials, Market Relationship, And Property Relationship And By Other Determiners Of Stratification Such As Status And Power , Party . Webber Rejected Marx’S View That Class Conflicts Inherent In Capitalism Were Simplistic And Could Be Resolved By Socialism³⁹.

Max Webber; (1864-1920).

After Marx, The Next Great Figure In The History Of Social Stratification Theory Is Max Webber. He Made Progress In Several Ways, Probably In Part Because Of His Desire To Correct Marx, Who Was One Of The Dominant Intellectual Figures When Webber’S Thought Was Taking Shape. Webber’S Trinitarian Model Of Social Stratification - Based On The Concepts Of Class, Status, And Party - Introduced A Systematic, Explicit, And Necessary Differentiation Into Stratification Theory⁴⁰.

In Comparison With Those Of Marx, Max Webber’S Specific Contributions To Stratification Theory Were Relatively Brief-Out, But No-Less Powerful. Two Sets Of Ideas Developed And Expanded By Webber Have Had A Particular Impact In Our Understanding Of Advanced Industrial Societies. The First, His Expansion Of Marx’S Single Class Or Economic Dimension Of Social Stratification Into A Multi-Dimensional View (Class, Status And Party) Has Provided Us With A Very Useful Tool In Understanding The Complex Nature Of Social Stratification. Perhaps Most Important, However, Webber’S Writings On The Development And Growth Of Large Bureaucratic Institutions Has Enabled Us To Understand The Nature Of Power And Dominance Within Advanced Industrial Societies Of All Types, Better Than Any Other Single Order By A Social Theorist⁴¹. We Begin With His Multi-Dimensional View Of Social Stratification. For Webber, Property, Prestige And Power Are Three Separate But Interacting Basis On Which The Hierarchies Are Created In Any Society. He Further Argues Than It Is Because Of Property Differences That Classes Are Generated. Political Parties Are Generated By Power Differences And Status Groups Are Generated By Prestige Differences⁴².

Webber Argued That Power Can Take A Variety Of Forms. Power, In General Refers To The Chance Of A Man Or Of A Number Of Men To Realize Their Own Will In A Communal Action Even Against The Resistance Of Others Who Are Participating In The Action. A Person’S Power Can Be Shown In The Social Order, Through His Or Her Status, In The Economic Order Through His Or Her Class, And In The Political Order Through His Or Her Party. Thus, According To Webber, Class, Status, And Party Are Three Components Of Social Stratification In Modern Industrial World⁴³.

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

Class

Webber Reversed The Concept Of Class For Economically Determined Stratification. For Webber, However, Classes Are Not Stable Groups Or Communities Produced By Existing Property Relations. Instead, They Are People Who Share Life Chances Or Possibilities That Are Determined By Economic Interests In The Possession Of Goods And Opportunities For Income Within The Commodity And Labour Market⁴⁴. According To Webber, That Property, And Lack Of Property Form The Basic Distinction Between Classes. But Webber Was Actually Concerned With The Conditions Under Which Class Consciousness Arise. For Him However, There Was No Single Form Of Class Consciousness Rather, Which Groups Develops A Consciousness Of Common Interests Opposed To Those Of Other Group Is A Specific Empirical Questions? Different Groups Acquire Historical Significance At Different Times And In Different Places. The Extent Of The Consciousness Of Kind Depends To A Considerable Degree On The General Culture Of A Society Particularly The Sets Of Intellectual Ideas Within It⁴⁵.

Status Order

Status Groups, On The Other Hand, Are Communities. The Fate Of Such Communities Is Determined Not By Their Chances On The Commodity Or Labour Market, However, But By A Specific, Positive Or Negative Social Estimation Of Honour. Such Honour Is Expressed Through Styles Of Life Or Conventions That Identify Individuals With Specific Social Circles. According To Webber, Race, Ethnicity, Religion, Taste In Fashion And The Arts, And Occupation Have Formed A Basis For Making Status Distinctions. More Than Anything, Membership In Status Groups Serves To Restrict An Individual’S Chances For Social Interaction⁴⁶. But Status Is Not As An Economic Class Standing. In Our Culture, A Successful Pickpocket May Be In The Same Income Class As A College Professor. Yet The Thief Is Widely Regarded As A Member Of A Low-Status Group, Where As The Professor Holds High Status.

As A General Rule, Status Is Associated With A Style Of Life. Those At The Top Of The Status Hierarchy Had A Different Life Style Than Do Those At The Bottom. In This Case, Lifestyle Or Status Is Related To Class Situation. But Class And Status Are Not Necessarily Linked To One Another⁴⁷.

Power

In Modern Societies, Webber Points Out, Party Formation Is An Important Aspect Of Power, And Can Be Influence Stratification Independently Of Class And Status. Party Defines A Group Of Individuals Who Work Together Because They Have Common Backgrounds, Aims Or Interests⁴⁸. To Webber Power Are Always Structures Struggling For Domination. Thus, Parties Are The Most Organized Elements Of Webbers Stratification System. Webber Thinks Of Parties Very Broadly As Including Not Only Those That Exist In The State But Also Those That May Exist In A Social Club. Parties Usually, But Not Always, Represent Class Or Status Groups. Whatever They Represent, Parties Are Oriented To The Attainment Of Power⁴⁹.

Webber Then Saw All Three Dimensions Are Important Hierarchies Leading To The Ranking Of Individuals Or Groups In Human Society. However, They Were Not All Of Equal Importance Throughout The History Of Human Societies. In The Early Stages Of Capitalism The Class Dimension As More Important. In Caste Societies, The Status Dimension Remained Supreme. And As We Have Said Webber Saw That In Modern Societies The Party Or Power, Dimension Gained Importance⁵⁰.

Criticism

This Theory Has Also Been Subjected To Critical Scrutiny Webbers Explanation Regarding Status Group Is Not Clear, Scholars Have Revealed Ambiguities In Webbers Assertion, While Evaluating The Tenability Of Webbers Theory.

Victor D’Souza Rightly Comments, Although Weber’S Contribution Adds To Our Knowledge On The Subject, But It Lacks The Requirement Of Theory. He Has Mainly Given A Description, Without Attempting The Formulations Of A Theoretical Model With Prepositions Which Are Deductively Related To One Another. His Variable, Called Status Honour Lacks Empirical Referents And His Treatment Of The Dimension Of Power, Called Party, Is Too Inadequate. It Is Clear Whether Webber Had An Opportunity Of Dealing With The Subject-Matter In A Thoroughly Manner As His Manuscript Which Was Post-Humously Published, Was Found Incomplete. In Any Case It Would Appear That Webber Was More Concerned About Presenting A Critique On Marx’S Theory Than With Putting Forward A Theory On His Own⁵¹.

In Contrast To The Theorists We Have Discussed, (Marx And Weber ) Emile Durkheim, Was Not Principally Concerned With Social Stratification. Rather, His Emphasis Were Established Sociology As A Scientific Discipline, Uncovering The Sources And Forms Of Integration And Moral Authority, And Understanding The Place Of Individualism In Modern Industrial Society. Most Of His Works Revolve Around The Issues Of Integration And Cohesiveness - That Is, The Question Of Order, In Society. Although Liberal And Reformist In Outlook Durkheim Was A Central Founder Of A Functionalist School Of Thought In Sociology. This Views Society As A Social System Tending Towards Equilibrium. The Organic Analogy Of Society Is A Clear In His Writing. Despite His Preoccupations With Questions Of Order And The Evolutionary Growth Of Societies, However, Durkheim Had Something To Say About Social Inequality And It Is For That Reason That This Brief Discussion Is Included Here.

Emile Durkheim (1858-1917)

The Key To Understand Durkheim’S Sociological Perspective, And Thus His View Of Social Stratification, Is His Organic Analogy. From This Perspective, Society Is Considered As Similar To A Biological Organism, There Are Various Parts Or Organs Within This Social System That Serve Different Functions For The Health And Maintenance Of The Total Society Much Like The Functions Served By Organs Within The Human Body⁵². It Is Easy To See That This Organic-Analogy Could Lead A Social Theorist To Focus On The Social System As A Whole And On The Interaction Of Its Parts Rather Than On Division Opposed Interests Among Groups Within The Society. Hence, This Organic Analogy Leads To A Perspective On Social Stratification Is Different From That Of Marx And Webber.

Within The Social System It Must Be Added, Durkheim Considered Morality To Be The Major Factor To Social Order And Integration. For Durkheim, It Has Been Said, Morality Was The Centre And The End Of His Work. The Importance Of Morality Is Maintaining Social Order Is Related To His View Of Human Nature, As Well As His View Of The Needs Of The Social System. Durkheim Was Distrustful Of Human Nature. Left To Them, He Thought People Would Be In Continuous Conflict, And Selfishly Dominating And Exploiting Fellow Human Beings For Their Own Narrow Interests. In Order To Save People From Social Chaos And Individual Destruction, A Strong Moral Order Is Necessary⁵³. In The Division Of Labour, Durkheim Saw Two Types Of Inequality, What He Called, Internal Or External Inequality .

In A Fully Developed Organic Society, Characterized By Individualism, Equal Opportunity, Specialization And Interdependence, Inequality Is To Be Expected Because It Is Based On Differences In The Internal Abilities Of Individuals. A Normal Division Of Labor Is Based On These Internal Differences Between Individuals Including Differences Between Men And Women. Differences In The Division Of Labour Between Men And Women Should Persist, But Other Differences, Including Classes, Based On External Qualities, (E.G. Race, Inheritance) Should Decline And Eventually Disappear. As Society Evolves, Differential Awards Should, Because Of Equal Opportunity, Directly Reflect Individual Differences In Abilities And Differences In The Social Value Of Occupations. In Short, Durkheim Believed That As Time Moved On, Modern Society Would Be Characterized By Social Inequalities Between Individuals Based On Their Inner Abilities Rather Than External Characteristics⁵⁴.

Durkheim Also Dealt With The Existence Of Class And Class Conflict By Dismissing Than As Unnatural, If The Division Of Labour Produces Conflict, It Is Either Because Society Is In A Transitional State Of Development, Or Because Of The Existence Of A Pathological Condition Of Social Order. This Pathological Condition Of Conflict Existed, In Durkheim’S View, Because The Occupational Guides Were Not Performing Their Proper Function Of Providing Moral Order And Society Was Being Threatened By Selfish Individual Or Group Interests. But It Never Occurred To Durkheim That The Whole System Of A Division Of Labour In Industrial Society Could Be A Power Structure For The Domination Of One Class By Another⁵⁵. Finally, With Respect To Dominance Of Norms And Values, Or The Moral Order Durkheim Held To Be So Important, It Did Not Occur To Durkheim. This Moral Order Itself Could Be A Mechanism Of Dominance By One Class Over Other. For Durkheim, The Moral Integration Of Society Served The Interests Of All In The Society.

The Functionalist Perspective On Social Stratification Proposes That Social Stratification Is Inevitable In Society And Is Therefore Universal. Generally, Functionalist Scholars (Talcott Parsons And Davis-Moore) Have Argued That Stratification Is Both Necessary And Desirable To Ensure That Difficult And Important Positions Will Be Filled By Individuals Capable Of Filling The Duties Associated With Such Positions. The Functionalist Perspective On Inequality Is Generally Interpreted As Being Conservative When Compared To Those Developed By Conflict – Oriented Or Radical Theorists. The Functionalist Theory Of Inequality Is Presented In Detail Because It Occupied An Important Place In Discussion And Controversies Concerning The Origins Of Inequality And Because The General Framework Of Functionalism Dominated Social Thought Throughout The World For Several Decades.

Talcott Parson (1902-1979)

Talcott Parsons Theory Is Mostly Concerned With How Societies Maintain Order. Generally, Functionalist Theorists Have Tended To Stress Stability, Consensus, And Integration In Society. They View Society As Similar To The Human Body With Its Many Organs. Like The Bodies Organs, Society’S Institutions Must Function Properly To Maintain The General Stability Of The Entire Social System. Parsons, More Than Other Functionalist Theorists, Believed That This Social Order Was Based Upon Values Shared By Members Of Society⁵⁶. According To Parson, In All Human Societies, Social Stratification Is Something Which Cannot Be Done Away With As Social Stratification Systems Are Right And Proper For They Express The Shared Values In A Given Society. It Is Because Of Social Stratification Rank Is Given To A Person According To The Tasks Or Roles Performed By That Individual⁵⁷.

The Central Element In Parsons Theory, Maintained That There Are Four ‘ Functional Imperatives’ Or Requirements Encountered By All Action Systems That Is, There Are Four Basic Problems That A Society, Group, Or Individual Must Confront In Order To Survive As A System Of Action⁵⁸. Parson Called All These Four Problems Or Functions Adaptation , Goal Attainment, Integration And Latent Pattern Maintenance (Agil ). That Is All Societies Must Solve Problems Of Agil. The Importance Of The Preceding In Understanding Social Stratification, Parsons Claimed, Is Twofold;

1. The Differing Tasks Of These Various Institutions Lead Them To Stress Differing Values (Or Pattern Variables).
2. Societies Differ With Respect To Which Of The Four Sets Of Institutions (Agil) Is Primary⁵⁹.

Thus, The Individuals Who Best Live Up To The Values Shaped By The Primary Institution Or Institutions Will Receive More Status, As Well As The Secondary Rewards That Are Tied To High Status, Like Wealth. Let Us Summarize, These Abstract Lines Extracted From Parsons Theory Of Social Stratification.

- A Persons Place In The Status Hierarchy Is Determined By The Moral Evaluation Of Others.
- This Moral Evaluation Is Made In Terms Of A Common Value System.
- The Common Value System Is Shaped By The Institution That Is Given Primary Stress In The Society.
- Thus, People Who Best Live Up These Values Or Ideas Will Receive, In Addition To High Status, Other Rewards, Such As High Income Or Wealth.

It Is Also Important To Note That Authority Or Power Is Attained Through An Individual’S Functional Position In The Occupational Structure Which Of Course, Is Gained Through Status Attainment⁶⁰. Thus, Parson Tried To Explain How Stratification Developed And Endures By Specifying The Functions That Stratification Or What He Likes To Call Patterned Inequality, Plays In Any Society, Whether, This Is Feudal, Capitalist Or The Communist Society.

Figure

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

Talcott Parsons Theory Of Social Stratification

Kingsley Davis And Wilbert Moore

Parsons Articulation Of A Functionalist Theory Of Social Stratification Was Further Developed By Kingsely Davis And Wilbert Moore In The 1945 Landmark Essay ‘ Some Principles Of Stratification ’, Published In America Sociological Review. In This Essay, They Set Forth A Notion Of Social Stratification That Shared The Basic Premises Elaborated By Talcott Parsons. They Said That Social Stratification Was Universal (In Varied Forms), Functional And Integral To Fulfilling The Division Of Labour.

According To Davis And Moore, Inequality Is Not Created By Natural Differences But By The Needs Of Society. Adopting The Functional Perspective, They Argued That Some Positions Are More Important To Social Wellbeing And Required Longer Training And Greater Skills⁶¹. The Positive Sides Of Social Stratification, Are Aimed At In The Theory Given By Davis And Moore, It Shows That How In A Given Society The Necessity Of Social Stratification Is Inevitable. They Emphasized On The Universality Of It And Also Highlighted Its Beneficial Consequences. An Individual Gains A Position In A Society As Per His Deservation, A Well - Talented And Able Person Deserves And Thus Gains Money And Prestige When There Is A Relative Scarcity Of Talented Individuals. The Higher Positions Are Given To Ones Who Make Their Efforts And Ability Count⁶². Yet This Assessment Often Devalues Work Performed By Certain Segments Of Society. The Following Points Provide A Basic Summary Of The Theory.

- Certain Positions In Society Are Functionally Important Than Others, And Require More Special Skills For Their Performance.
- Only A Limited Number Of Individuals In Any Society Have The Talents Which Can Be Trained Into The Skills Appropriate To These Positions.
- The Conversion Of Talents Into The Skills Involves A Period During Which Sacrifices Of One Kind Or Another Are Made By Those Undergoing The Training.
- In Order To Introduce The Talented Persons To Undergo These Sacrifices And Acquire The Training, Their Future Positions Must Carry An Inducement Value In The Form Of Differential Access To The Scarce And Desired Rewards Which The Society Has To Offer.
- These Scarce And Desired Goods Consist Of The Rights And Prerequisites Attached To, Or Built Into, The Positions And Can Be Classified Into Those Things Which Contribute To (A) Sustenance And Comfort , (B) Humor And Diversion , (C) Self-Respect And Ego Expansion .
- The Differential Access To The Basic Rewards Of The Society Has, As A Consequence The Differentiation Of The Prestige And Esteem Which Various Strata Acquire. This May Be Said, Along With The Rights And Perquisites, To Constitute Institutionalized Social Inequality, I.E. Stratification.
- Therefore, Social Inequality Among Different Strata In The Amounts Of Scarce And Desire Goods, And The Amounts Of Prestige And Esteem Which They Receive, Is Both Positively Functional And Inevitable In Any Society⁶³.

Figure

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

The Davis –Moore Theory Of Stratification

Thus, Social Inequality Is An Unconsciously Evolved Device By Which Societies Insure That The Most Important Positions Are Conscientiously Filled By The Most Qualified Persons. Hence, Every Society No Matter How Simple Or Complex, Must Differentiate Person’S Interims Of Both Prestige And Esteem And Must Therefore Possess A Certain Amount Of Institutionalized Inequality.

Tumin: Critical Response

Melvin Tumin Was The First Sociologist To Point Out The Shortcomings In The Functionalist Perspective, In His Essay ‘Some Principles Of Stratification’, A Critical Response (In 1953) Who Argued That It Was Impossible To Calculate The Functional Importance Of Any Position In Society Objectively. The Following Are Timmins Critical Arguments About The Davis And Moore Theory.

The Contribution Of Davis And Moore Especially Has Evoked Critical Response On The Part Of Number Of Scholars. The Most Bitterly Criticized Proposition In The Theory Which The Authors Have Been Persuaded To Reject Is Their Assumption That Social Stratification/Inequality Is Beneficial Only When It Ensures That The Most Capable People Occupy The Most Important Positions. However, One Of The Rewards Elites Receive Is The Ability To Help Their Offspring’S Attain The Good Life. The Problem Is That The Children Of Highly Capable People Are Not Necessarily Highly Capable Themselves. The Result Is A Situation In Which Many People Enjoy Upper-Class Status, Not Because Of Their Merit, But Because Of That Of Their Ancestors. The Second Thing Has Also Been Pointed Out That There Is No Way Of Knowing The Functional Importance Of The Positions. There Have Also Been Attempts To Suggest That There Can Be Other Functional Alternatives To Unequal Rewards For Motivating People To Fill Different Positions.

Second, The Fact That Modern Society Continue To Allow Ascriptive Factors Such As Race And Gender To Substantially Limit Access To Elite Positions, Even For Highly Talented People, Also Challenge The Logic Of Davis-Moore.

Third, There Are Serious Questions About Which Positions Ought To Be Highly Rewarded. In A Capitalist Economy, A Given Occupation’S Pay Is Determined By The Market, Not By A Rational Assessment Of It’S With To Society. The Result Has Been Extremely High Salaries For Rock-Stars, Athletes And Movie Actors Whose Contribution To Society Is Debatable, Very Low Salaries For Such Crucial Occupation As Social Workers, Child-Care Providers And Teachers.

Fourth, Davis - Moore Ignore The Role Of Power, Plays In Determining How Well Various Occupations Will Be Rewarded, Professional Associations, Such As The Medical Associations And Labour Unions, Have Artificially Drive Up The Wages Of Their Members By Restricting The Supply Of Workers.

Finally, The Extents Of Social Inequality Are The Extreme Of Wealth. Major Film Stars Earn As Much As $20 Million Per Movie. Physician’S Annual Salaries Commonly Exceed $200000. Presidents Of Major Corporations Routinely Make At Least 100 Times More Money Than Their Entry Level Employees. At The Same Time, 38 Million People Are Living Below The Poverty Line, And Hundreds And Thousands Are Homeless.

The Davis-Moore Thesis Does Make Some Good Points. The Relatively Low Wages Paid To Scientists And Engineers In The Former Soviet Union Did Seem To Make Them Less Willing To Work Hard. And 75% Of Americans Polled In 1987 Agreed That No One Could Be Expected To Study For Years To Become A Doctor Or Lawyer Unless They Expected To Earn A Lot More Than Ordinary Workers. However, The Theory Is At Best One-Sided In That It Ignores The Negative Impact Of Structured Inequality On The Working And Lower Classes⁶⁴.

1.5 Social Stratification Indian Perspective

Enormous Literature Exists On Caste And Its Various Parameters. The Origin And Evolution Of Caste At International, National And Regional Levels Have Been Studied In Spatio-Temporal Perspectives. The Ancient, Medieval And Modern Literature On It, Have Been Thoroughly Received And Analyzed. The Caste System, Its Nature And Structure, Has Also Been Elaborately Studied By Sociologists, Anthropologists, And Ethnographers. A Great Deal Of Survey On Available Literature Has Been Done On The Broader Theme Of Caste In India, Emphasizing On Social Stratification. In Fact, Social Stratification Is A Topic Dealt With Both Indigent And Alien Sociologists. This All Has Given Rise To A Harvest Of Literature On The Issue Of Social Stratification. The Caste, Class And Power As Major Components Of Society, Have Also Been Studied By Different Scholars In A Variety Of Ways At National And Regional Levels (Beteille 1974, Singh 1974, Menchar 1978, Pandit 1979, Singh 1982 ). The Changing Nature Of Caste And Social System Has Also Been Studied In-Depth By M.N. Srinivas 1966 , Singh 1968 .

The Early Encounter Of British/Western With Verna-Jati System Of India Resulted In A Study And Research With Two Kinds Of Interests And Research. A Group Of Writers, Made Their Research Directly On Sacred Literature With An Attempt To Bring Forth Various Elements Of Varna–Model Of Hindu Caste System In India. These Scholars Like Wilson , Monier , Williams , Colebrook , Max Muller , And Zimmer Constitute This Group. Another Group Of Scholars, Mostly Administrators With An Academic Bent Of Mind, Have Shown Interest In The Caste System With Their Focus On Caste, Emphasizing Mainly Distribution And Description Of Social And Cultural Features Of The Sub-Castes. This Resulted In The Abundant Literature About Various Castes And Tribes In India. A Descriptive Material On One Or The Other Tribe Was Produced By Every Census-Commissioner In His Own Way. An Outcome Of These Writings Was Acceptance Of Generalizations On The Matters As The Origin And Essence Of The Caste System, Function Of Caste In The Broader Social System, Relation Between Race And Caste , Difference Between Caste &Amp; Tribe , The Broader Pattern Of Inter-Caste Relationship/ Social Precedence In Different Religions, Patterns Of Social Mobility And Trends Of Change In Education And Occupation And Its Impact On Caste In Different Regions Of India.

These Generalizations Did Not Come Up With A Description About The Functioning Of Caste In Local Communities. It Was District And Village Land Revenue Settlement Report Which Contained Detailed Information On The Relationship Between Local Caste System And Land Tenure. The Early Reports Were B.H. Badam Powell’S . The Land System Of British India (1882 ) And Indian Village Community (1896 ) Are Worth Mentioning In This Regard. During The Period Of 1900-1930 Along With Census-Type Surveys And Glossaries, A Few Ethnographic Monographs Published. Most Of These Were On Various Tribes, Caste And Sects. The Prominent Efforts In This Regard Are G.W. Briggs Study About Chammers (1920 ) And N.A. Toothis Study On Vaisnavas Of Gujarat (1935 ).

Some Academicians And Social Thinkers Came-Forth To Understand Caste System In Their Own Ways When There Was A Development Of Systematic Ideas Among The Census Administrators Going On. In This Regard, Karl Marx Stands As A Pioneer Figure In The 19th And Early 20th Century. Karl Marx Related The Asiatic Mode Of Production To The Stability Of The Caste System In India. H.J.S Maine ‘Caste As An Example Of Non-Contractual Status Society’. E-Senart ‘Caste As A System Of Stratification Based On Purity Of Descent And Purity Of Occupation. Max Webber Caste As A System Of Status Stratification, Bougle , Hereditary Specialization Hierarchy And Mutual Repulsion As A Basis Of Caste System, And A.M Hocart Caste As A System Of Social Hierarchy Developed Their Own Ideas And These Thinkers Set Their Minds In Understanding The Caste System, Based On The Right That Each Caste Has To Perform Certain Rituals And Services To The Feudal Lords.

This Development Gave Birth To A Group Of Indian Scholars Who Followed British Model In Preparing General Ethnography And Regional Glossaries Of Castes In India. In This Regard, J.N. Bhattacharya’S ‘Hindu Castes And Sects (1896), L.A.K Iyers The Cochin Tribes And Castes (1909-12), G.H. Desai’S A Glossary Of Castes, Tribes And Races In The Baroda State (1912) And G.S Ghurye’S Caste And Race In India In 1932 Etc Stood As The Pioneering Work In This Field. These Works Discussed The Origin And Development Of The Caste System In India.

M.N Srinivas, An Indian Sociologist, Study On Religion And Society Among The Coorgs Of South India Was A Pioneer Work Which Attempted To Study Caste Organization As A Functioning System. According To Him, Caste System Is Based On The Philosophy Of Karma And Dharma Which Strengths The Idea Of Hierarchy Which Is Inherent In The Hindu Society. He Further Gives The Concept Of Purity And Pollution Which Governs Relation Between Different Castes. He Further Says, The Caste Status Is Mutable And Upward Mobility In The System Is Accompanied By Sanskritization Of Rituals. The First Manifestation Is Found In The Process Of Sanskritization Whereby The Lower Castes Seeks To Emulate The Cultural Styles, Beliefs, Rituals And Give-Up Some Of Their Own Older Modes Of Living And Cultural Practices Supposedly Polluting To Claim A Higher Status In The Caste Hierarchy. Following Srinivas, Many Sociologists In India Carried Out Studies Related To Various Aspects Of The Caste. Some Of These Studies Were On The Topics Such As, Village Studies, Caste And Politics, Caste And Economic Development, Caste And Land Tenure, Caste, Class And Social Inequality, Caste Mobility And Caste In The Urban Setting.

Between 1951 And 1954, Some British And American Scholars Found The Economic Weekly As One Of The Important Platforms For Getting Across Their Perceptions And Observations On The Indian Villages And Its Social Structure. They Studied The Changing Realities Of Village India. M.N Srinivas , Makim Marriott , S.C Dube And Others Were Prominent Among These Scholar’S, There Emphases Was On The Integration Of A Number Of Castes Which Form A Functioning Local Community, Rather Than On The Ethnography Of A Single Caste. Furthermore, They Focused Their Attention On Topics Such As, Inter-Caste Hierarchy, Factionalism, Jajmani Relationship, Relationship Between Caste And Class, Relationship Between Village And The Large Societies And Trends Of Social Change. Among The Important Sociologists And Other Social Scientists Who Carried Studies In Caste And Caste Related Areas At That Time Are; F.G. Bailey (1957-1960), G.D. Berreman (1960), A. Beteille (1965), B.R. Chauhan (1957), S.C Dube (1958), D.N Majumdar (1958), T.N Madam (1965), K.S Mathur (1165), R.K. Mukherjee (1957), And H. Orenstein (1965) .

The Role Of Caste In Politics And The Vice-Versa Was The Second Important Theme Discussed By The Social Scientists, And Sociologists. It Is Believed That Between The Year 1954 - 1957 , Maureen Pattersion 1954 , S. Harrison (1954) And M.N. Srinivas (1959) , Discussed, In A Series Of Articles, How Caste Consciousness Was Being Strengthened At The State Level In The Context Of Parliamentary Politics Based On Adult Franchise And Constitutional Safeguards To The Backwards Sections Of The Population. N.K. Bose (1958) , Pointed Out That Differential Rate Of Social Change Among The Castes In A Region Is The Main Cause Of Strengthened Of The Caste As A Mode Of Group Identification. It May Be Due To A Slow Expansion Of The Structure Of Opportunity In An Economy Of Scarcity. R.W. Retzlaffs Village Government In India (1962) Made A Detailed Analysis Of The Operation Of Caste Based Village Politics Under Panchayat Raj In Rajasthan.

Towards The End Of 1950s Structuralism And Marxism Made Their Entry, The Former Led By Louis Dumont And D.F. Pocock And Latter By A.R. Desai , Daniel Thorner And Charles Dettellheim . The Decades Of 1960s And 1970s Saw A Few Studies In Which Differentiation, Evolution, And Change In Caste And Class Over A Period Of Time Have Been Focused. Besides, Sociologists And Social Anthropologists, Historians, And Economists Have Taken Up Studies From Structural - Historical Perspective Particularly Of Agrarian And Industrial Stratification, Prominent Among These Are/Were- E.R. Leach (1960), B. Ansari (1960), Louis Dumont (1961), S.H. Risley (1961), S.C. Dube (1961), Zarina Ahmad (1962), Victor D’Souza (1962), Andre Beteille (1962), I.G. Bailey (1965), And Makim Marriott (1968) .

The Contribution Of Louis Dumont (1961) Is Clearly Seen In His Assertion/Theory Of ‘ Homo – Hierarchies’ Explain The Whole Structure Of Caste As Arising From, Certain Ideological Predilections, Which Are Religious In Nature. It Is Clearly Seen In Dumont’S Assertion, That It Is Hierarchy Which Is Pervasive Principle Of Hindu Society And The Caste System Is Only One Expression Of It. According To Him, Caste Is Based On The Principle Of Opposition Between The Pure And Impure Is A Single True Principle Signifying Hierarchy In Terms Of The Superiority And Inferiority Of The Pure Over Impure, And It Is This Principle Of Pure And Impure That Determines Hierarchy. He Contrasts The Caste System As Containing Hierarchical View Of Man With The Class System Of The West. He Analyzed Caste System In Terms Of Purity And Pollution Dichotomy And In Terms Of Status And Power Dichotomy. In Hinduism, Hierarchy Is Based Upon Ritual Ideas Of Purity And Pollution And This Is Quite Different From The Western With Equality Of Opportunity.

He Further Says That Caste Status Is Always Determined By Ritual Ideas Irrespective Of Power And Wealth Of The Individual, E.G., In The Traditional Indian Society The Priest (Brahmin), Whose Position Is Derived From Hierarchy, Had A Higher Status Than The More Powerful King (Kshatriya).

He Presumes That Hierarchy And Inequality Are Natural To Man, And Indian Consciously Accepted The Hierarchy Based On Status Differences. In Hindu Society, The Primacy Is Given To The Whole, And This Whole Is Structured Hierarchically.

The Problem With Dumont’S Work Is That It Does Not Explain The Change In Caste Status Which Has Taken Place Owing To Change In Power Of A Group, Nor Does It Explain The Dispute About Ranking That Is There In Caste System. The Disagreement With Dumont’S Understanding Of Indian Society As Being Completely Determined By Ritual Ideas Of Purity And Pollution And He Asserts That Caste Is Merely A Type Of Stratification Different In Degrees But Not In Kind From Other Types Of Stratification As Class. Thus, Dumont Did Not Comprehend The Situation That Exists Today, In Terms Of Resilience Of The Caste System.

Victor D’ Souza’S Study (1967) Of Caste And Class In Chandigarh Highlights Significance Of The Continuum Of The Rigidity-Fluidity Dimensions. He Clearly Demonstrates A Dividing Line Between Caste And Class. He Maintains That Caste And Class Systems Stand For Different Patterns Of Distribution Of Properties Of Individuals In Hereditary Groups. He Asserts That Caste Is Not An Exclusively Cultural System. He Finds Caste And Class Are Different Forms Of Stratification. He Observes Groups (Jati’S) Are Ranked In The Caste System, Whereas Positions Are Ranked In Social Stratification (Particularly With Reference To Class Stratification). The Ranking Of Endogamous Groups And Not The Endogamy As The Rule Of Marriage Is The Hallmark Of Caste System In Chandigarh. He Further Says That Changes In The Caste System Have Brought About Changes In The Properties Of Individual Members. A Hereditary Group Might Continue In The Caste System As A Class. This Explains Similarity Between Caste And Class. D’ Souza Decisively Concludes That Class Is Replacing Caste And The Individual Is Replacing The Group. D ‘Souza’S Basic Assumption Of Formulation Is That, A Certain Place For The Individual As A Unit Of Social Status And A Certain Level Of Social Mobility Are That Level.

Another Sociologist Andre Beteille (1969) Has Contributed Immensely In This Field. Andre Beteille’S Study Of Village Sripurum In Tamil Nadu Is Based On The Assumption Of A Rational Distinction Between Caste, Class And Power , Changing Relation Of Stratification In Tanjore District, Brought To Light The Traditional Caste Structure As Well As The Forces Of Change That Were Making Way Into It. According To Beteille, Sripurum Village Is An Agrarian Village. The Whole Village Is Dominated By The King Of The Brahman To Look After The Temples And Other Building Of The Village. In Tanjore He Finds Caste System Of The Village To Be More Rigid And Complex. The Caste System, Apart From Determining The Unequal Ritual Status Of Villagers, Also Dominates Their Political And Economic Life. The Social Life Of The Village Has Also Structured On Caste Lines. The Settlement Pattern Of The Village Has Also Evolved On Caste Lines. The People Of Sripurum Divide The Many Castes Of Hindu Into Three Subdivisions - Brahmins , Non-Brahmins And The Adi-Dravidas Are Clearly Segregated From One Another In The Village. The Settlement Pattern Of The Village Continues To Reflect The Basic Division Of The Traditional Caste Structure. The Study Finds That In Tanjore, The Ownership Of Land Is Not Only A Source Of Wealth; It Is Also A Source Of Prestige And Power. The Study Also Finds The Class Structure, Which Is Largely Vertical. The Class System Comprises Of Three Economic Units In The Society, (1) Brahmins (Landowner) (2) Non- Brahmins (Tenants Of Brahmins) (3) And Adi-Dravida’S Or Original Dravida’S (Sub-Tenants Or Agriculturalists Or Labour) And Their Mutual Relations. In The Social Stratification System, Brahmins Were At The Top Stratum Of The Society, Non-Brahmins Were Next To Them, And Adi-Dravidian Was At The Bottom Of The Social Stratification. They Were Treated As Untouchables. Caste, Class And Power Relate In Different Ways To The Broader Phenomenon Of Social Stratification.

In The Political Sphere, Or Say In The Village Panchayats, Brahmins Were Occupying The Power. They Decided The Dispute Within The Village. Before 1920, The Brahmin Group Was Enjoying The Political Power. Non-Brahmins And Adi-Dravidians Were Having No Say In The Villager Panchayat. Andre Beteille Calls It Cumulative Inequality . The Study Finds That In Comparison To The Rigidity Of The Institution Of Caste As Well As Stability Of The Traditional Economic Structure Of The Village, The Distribution Of Political Power Has Witnessed A Radical Change. The Study Found That Caste, Class And Power Were Closely Interwoven In The Village. They Could Be Treated Separately Only By A Process Of Abstraction, Caste And Power In Sripurum Village Referred In Different Ways To The Same Phenomenon Of Social Stratification.

Yogendra Singh’S Name As Well As His Contribution Stands At The Top Rung With Regard To The Study Of Social Stratification In General And In India Particular.

Yogendra Singh Argued That The Theoretical Position Of Caste Constituted Both A Structural Unit Of Social Stratification As Well As A System. Sociologists Who Looked Across The Cultural View Of Caste Associated It With An Autonomous Principle Of Stratification, Which Are, Institutionalized Inequality, Social System Of Social Mobility, An Elementary Level Of Division Of Labour Legitimized On Ritual Bases Of Reciprocity, And Emphasis On Quality, (Ritual Purity Or Racial Purity ) Rather Than Performance, In Other Words, Caste Is Associated With An Autonomous Form Of Cultural System Or World View⁶⁵. In This Regard, He Quotes, A. Nesfield (1885), Max Webber (1952), A.L. Kroeber, (1930) And A. Dubois (1960) Etc. Moreover, In The Writings Of Kingsley Davis (1951), A.R. Desai (1966) And N.K Bose (1968) And Others, Caste Was Considered A Structural Reality Which Would Disappear When The Society In India Reaches To A Higher Level. He Made A Distinction Between Sociologists Who Treat Caste As A Cultural Phenomenon And Those Who Define It As A Structural Phenomenon. So Far As, The Indian System Of Social Stratification Was Concerned, The Structural Particularistic Treatment Of Caste Stratification Is Considered The Most Dominant Feature Of Stratification Studies In India. In This Framework, Caste Is Treated As An Institutionalized System Of Interaction Among Hierarchically Ranked Hereditary Groups For Marriage, Occupation, Economic Division Of Labor, Enforcement Of Cultural Norms And Values By Caste Bodies And Performance Of Rituals Based On Principles Of Purity And Pollution. The Major Cultural Norm Of Caste Is Described As That Of Mutual Repulsion By Bougle . These Attributes Assume Relevance As Their Operation Sets A Limit To The Forms Of Allocation And Evaluation Of Roles And Status Attributes Of Caste And Perpetuate An Institutionalized Form Of Social Inequality. Structurally, The Relevant Issues That Have Been Raised In Caste Stratification Relate Firstly To The Unit Components In Caste Ranking Such As Varna’S, Caste And Sub-Castes. Secondly, Formation Of New Castes By Caste-Dominance, And Finally, To The Extent Of Social Mobility In The Caste System. Structural Properties Of Caste In The Process Of Social Stratification In India Lies At Two Levels; Firstly, The Extent To Which New Forces Such As Democratization, Industrialization, Land Reforms, Other Social Legislations Etc Affect The Traditional Structure Of Caste Stratification And Create Cleavages In The Summation Of Social Statuses Based On Ritual Prestige, Economic Rank And Political Power; And Secondly The Degree To Which Castes That Undergo The Process Of New Structural Differentiation, And Creates Condition For The Processes Of Social Mobility And Change In This System. The Notion Of Social Mobility Advanced By M.N. Srinivas , Which Was Explained In The Concept Of Downward Mobility, Proletarianization And Bourgeoisiefication As A Process Of Structural Change.

Another Approach To The Study Of Caste Stratification In India Was Suggested By Makim Marriot . He Argues That In Order To Gain Fuller Understanding Of The Stratification In India At Various Levels, The Rural Stratification Must Be Seen As Different From Metropolitan System Of Ranking. According To Him, The Rural Stratification Is Closed And Urban Stratification Is Relatively Open. However, He Opined That If The Industrialization Process Proceeded Rapidly, The Caste System Will Have Essentially Disorganization Effect By The End Of Century. On The Same Lines, Kingsley Davis (1951), A.R. Desai 1969, M.N. Srinivas (1962) And Andre Beteille (1969) Foresaw The Possibility Of Transformation Of Caste Into Class Through Adaptive Changes Under The Impact Of Industrialization.

The Decade 1970-1980 Has Contributed Richly To The Emergence Of Few Substantive And Theoretical Concerns In The Study Of Social Stratification. During This Period Many Sociologists Have Contributed For The Further Understanding Of Social Stratification In India. These Were; R.K. Mukherjee (1970), A. Jha (1970), T.N Madan (1971), Reddy (1973), Yogendra Singh (1978), Zarina Bhatty (1978), Dhanagare (1979), Kathleen Gough (1979), Nirmal Singh (1979) Etc.

India Was A Static Society Where Not Change But Continuity Of A Primitive Variety Was The Dominant Feature. This View Was Also Supported By The Early Writings Of Karl Marx. So, In Analyzing Indian Class Stratification, It Was Not Considered Worthwhile To Take Into Account The Present Day Processes Among The Various Social Strata. Studies On The Traditional Indian Society Revealed That The Class Structure Was Related To The Mode Of Production, And Ownership Of Property, Growth Of Cities, Markets And Banking Instructions, And The Intuitions Of Power. This Led To The Emergence Of Various Class Categories. It Was Also Analyzed How The Forms/Structures Of Class Changed In Various Historical Stages Of Development.

There Are Also A Few Studies In Which Differentiation, Evolution And Change In Caste And Class Over A Period Of Time Have Been Focused. The Emphasis In These Studies Could Be Seen In Caste, Caste And Class Alone, Again Caste And Now Caste And Class, As Parts Of Social Formation.

Another Area Of Significant Research, Besides Sociologists And Social Anthropologists, In Which Historians And Economists Have Taken Up Studies From Structural-Historical Stratification Particularly Of The Industrial And Agrarian Stratification And Modes Of Production In Agriculture Vis-A-Vis Rural Class Structure, And Its Changing Patterns Due To Various Aspects Of Change.

The Agrarian System As It Evolved During The British Regime In India Was Based Either On The Zamindari Or The Ryotwari Or Mode Of Revenue Assessment Type Of Land Settlement. All The Three Systems Generated More Or Less A Similar Agrarian Class Structure In The Villages. The Zamindari System Had The Zamindar’S, Tenants, And Agricultural Labourers As The Main Agrarian Classes. The Ryotwari System Consisted Of Two Types Of Peasants; The Ryot-Landlords And The Ryot-Peasants. The Agrarian Class Structure Everywhere In India Had A Feudal Character. The Zamindar’S Were Tax Gathers And Non-Cultivating Owners Of Land, The Tenants Were The Real Cultivators, Often Without Security, Of Land Tenure, And The Agriculture Laborers Had The Status Of Bonds-Men And Attached-Laborers.

In This Regard, Kathleen Gough (1979) Using The Same Approach To The Study Of Rural Social Stratification In The Tanjavur Village . The Colonial Economics Of This Region, Its Kinship Structure, And Peasant Movements In A Comparative Study Of Kinship And Mode Of Production On Tanjavur And Kerala, She Referred With The Marxists Model Of The Asiatic, Feudal, And Capitalist’S Mode Of Production In India Within The Overarching System Of Colonialism. She Maintains That The Asiatic Mode Was Formerly Dominated In Tanjavur Village And Kerala State Was Formerly Dominant By Feudal System Because Land Was Owned Privately By Gentry, Noble, Royal, And Priestly Households. She Argued That Both Regions Have Become Predominantly Capitalist In Their Mode Of Production In The Modern Period Because Of Their Absorption Into A World Market⁶⁶. In Her Studies, The Mode Of Production Debate, She Highlights The Issues Related To The Nature Of Agrarian Class Structure, And Differentiation Of Peasantry These Studies Refer To The Forces And Factors Of Class Polarization, Exploitation, Bourgeoisiefication Of The Peasantry And Pauperization Of The Rural Working Class. Thus, The Basic Concern Is The Study Of Origin, Structure And Change In Caste And Class In India, Caste And Kinship Are Analyzed From A Class Point Of View Caste Is Not Treated As Culture- Specific System, But A Reflection Of Class Relationships.

Another Noteworthy Trend From The 1970s Onwards Is Revival Of The Themes Of Origin Or Evolution Of The Institutions Of Caste, Occupational Groups And Classes. An Associated New Phenomenon Is The Increasing Use Of History And Historiography In The Analysis Of Social Institutions.

All These Things Have Largely Converged In India The Realm Of Social Science In General And Sociology In Particular During The 1970s-1980s . An Important Development In 1980s To 1990s Have Been The Rich Input Into The Study Of Stratification, Both Into Its Conceptual And Methodological Studies By Many Sociologists, These Are Dipankar Gupta (1980), Duncan B. Forester (1980), Klass Morton (1980), Pradeep Kumar Bose (1981), H.A. Lye (1985), M. Husain (1985), Nandu Ram (1986), K.L. Sharma (1986), A.F.I. Ali (1987), D.N. Dhanagare (1987), A.M. Shah (1988), Ehsan-Ul Haq (1989) .

Caste Is Found As A Persisting Social Reality By Dipankar Gupta (1980). He Relates The Varna To Jati System Of Stratification Of The Indian Caste System, From The Asiatic To The Feudal Mode Of Production Respectively. The Four Fold Division Of Society Into Brahmin , Kshatriya , Viashnu , And Shudra Is A View From Top Of The Hierarchy, But The View From The Bottom Is More Varied And It May, In Fact, Appear Less Differentiated, Because Economic Obligation Were Only Directed Vertically. Dipankar Gupta Explains Painstakingly, That Varna And Jati Are Reflective Of Specific Socio- Economic Formations And That The Origins Of The Caste System Should Be Sought In The Material History Of India And Not In The Empyrean Recess Of The Hindu Mind. The Caste System Development In The Feudal Epoch And Was Characterized By Localized Exploitation, Where As The Varna Is A System In The Epoch Of Asiatic Mode Of Production.

A.M Shah (1988) In His Study On The Vanais And Rajputs Of Gujarat Has Treated Each Caste Has A Separate Entity Without Making Any Statement On The Nature Of Hierarchy That Might Pertain Between Them.

D.N. Dhanagare (1987) In His Study Of Green Revolution And Social Inequalities In Rural India Poses The Question? Has The Green Revolution Succeeded In Reducing Socio-Economic Inequalities In Rural India? He Concluded That In General The Findings Of Different Studies Show That The Green Revolution Has Had A Contradictory Impact On The Rural Development And Agricultural Wages. Green Revolution Technology Has Not Proved To Be A Measure Of Poverty Alleviation. On The Contrary, There Is Evidence To Show That Greater And Greater Immiseration And Pauperization Has Surfaced With The Study Growth Of Socio-Economic Inequalities In Rural India Due To Green Revolution.

In The Last Decade Of The 20th Century We See Sociologists Talking About Changes In Class Structure In The Contemporary Indian Society. Prominent Among Them Are; Pradeep Kumar Bose (1990), Andre Beteille (1991), R.K. Shudra (1991), Vijay Kumar Vashista (1992), Suvira Jaiswal (1993), K.L. Sharma (2001), Andre Beteille (2002) , Etc Probably These Were The Sociologists Who Has Pointed Towards Changes Taking Place In Social Stratification In Indian Society.

Pradeep Kumar Bose (1990), Talks About The Information Of The Class Structure In Contemporary India. The Main Themes In His Article Are The Capital-Labor Relation And Conceptualizations Of Classes Are Basic Problem In The Understanding Of The Transformation Of Class Structure. Any Change In Class Structure Involves Class Decomposition, Class Transformation, And Class Formation. He Further Says That There Is A Continuous Dialectic Between Capitalism And The Pre-Existing Social Formation, Class Formation, Class Disintegration, And Class Conflict, Hence Become Important In The Process Of Change In The Class Structure. Bose Identifies Three Approaches In The Definition Of Agrarian Classes (1) The Indigenous (2) The Distributional, And (3) The Structural. On The Bases Of These Approaches Bose Identified, Five Classes, Comprising Of Landlords, Rich Peasant, Middle Peasant And Agricultural Laborers. A Relationship Between Them Is Also Made In Terms Of Social Status And Mobility.

Another Sociologist, Vijay Kumar Vashistha (1992) In His Article Analyzes Struggle Of The Chammar Peasants In A Jagir In The Princely State Of Jaipur . He Finds That All India State People Bairwa Mahasabha Played An Effective Role In Ameliorating The Social Conditions Of The Chammars, Of The Area. He Quoted That Occupational And Social Mobility Could Be Seen Discarding The Unclean Traditional Callings And Adoption Of Agriculture And Animal Husbandry. They Have Stopped Rendering Beggar, Imitation Of Brahmanical Style Of Life And Dress Pattern Were Some Of The Visible Consequences Of Social And Occupational Mobility Among The Chammars Of A Feudal State. He Reports Several Cases Of Protests Against Atrocities By The Chammars And Its Impact On The People In The Region.

The Distinction Between Two Forms Of Inequality Called ‘ Hierarchical And Competitive Inequality’ Was Introduced By Andre Beteille In His Article ‘ Hierarchical And Competitive Inequality’ . This Distinction According To Him Is Conceptual And Analytical Rather Than Empirical. He Argued That Both Kinds Of Inequalities Are Inseparable In A Particular Society. Moreover, This Distinction Is Of Great Importance Historically And Comparatively Because On The One Hand, They Are Inseparable In Most Societies And On The Other, They Are Intermingling Differently In Different Societies.

According To Him, Hierarchical Inequalities Are Characteristic Of A Certain Kind Of Society, Based On Castes Or Estates. Such A Society Has Not Only A Distinctive Morphology That Is, But Also Distinctive Laws, Customs And Practices. He Further Says That Persons Belonging To Different Castes And Different Communities Are Assigning Different And Unequal Positions In Society. Persons At Different Ends Of The Social Stratum Are Not Expected To Compete With Each Other, For Social Recognition And Rewards. According To Him, Changes Have Taken Place Continuously In Legal, Political And Economic Institutions, And These Have Slowly Eaten Into The Hierarchical Conception Of The Word. Relation Between Man And Woman, Between The High And The Low-Born, And Even Between The Rich And The Poor Have Altered⁶⁷.

Finally, He Says That Although All Modern Societies Are Stratified, They Are Not All Stratified In The Same Way Or To The Same Extent. Firstly, Societies Differ In The Distance Between The Top And The Bottom Ranks, And In The Number Of Ranks In Between. This Is True Not Only Of Society As A Whole But Also Its Major Associations, Situations And Organization. Secondly, Societies Differ To The Extent In Which Individuals Are Able To Move Between Inferior And Superior Positions, Across Generation And Within The Same Generation. Although Social Mobility Presupposes Social Stratification There Is No Simple One – To – One Relationship Between The Two Societies Or Social Situations That Have Many And Widely Separated Ranks May Also Have High Rates Of Individual Mobility.

Criticism:

The Revelation Is Made By Many Studies On Various Trends And Patterns Of Social Stratification That These Studies Were Caste-Oriented, And Caste Based. Caste Being The Sole Basis Of Social Stratification, But Not The Only Dominating Factor, As For Classes Like Political Elites, New Capitalists, Bureaucrats, Technocrats And Others Were Emerging As Factors For Social Inequality In Post 1947 Scenario. It Is Very Clear That The Sociologists Failed To Address These Factors And Also The Cause Of Their Emergence. The Result Of It Was That Sociologists Studied Caste Stratification Devoid Of Above Mentioned Factors Has Distorted The Reality And The Actuality Of The Situation Did Not Come Into Light. The Sociologists Thus, Were Not Able To Analyses The Role Of These Factors.

Sociologists Did Not Attribute To Highlight The Nature Of Social Stratification In Urban Areas. The Study On Social Stratification In Urban Areas Was Not On Large Scale. With The Result, The Phenomenon Of Social Stratification In Urban Areas Remained Far From Total Revelation. It Is Also Worth Mentioning That Urban Context Does Not Allow Caste - Factor To Dominate Comparatively. So, The Need Was To Look Forward With Existential Realities Related To Caste In Urban Areas.

The General Framework For Studies About Caste Was Ideal Typical. The Realistic Picture Was Not Provided By These Studies As The Analyzation Of Caste In The Industrializing, Urbanizing And Modernizing Context Of India.

From The Above Review Of Literature, It Is Clear That There Is A Harvest Of Sociological Literature On Caste Stratification In India. But The Great Bulk Of This Literature Is Confined To The Study And Analysis Of Traditional Caste As It Functions Among The Hindus. A Large Number Of Indian As Well As Western Sociologists And Social Anthropologists Interested In Understanding Indian Society Have Paid Specific Attention To The Analysis Of Traditional Caste System And The Changes Taking Place Therein. But Such Studies Are Confined On Hindu Society And Culture, And Throw Insufficient Light On Different Aspects Of Social Life Or Particularly Social Stratification Among Indian Muslims. The Empirical Realities Demand That The Caste Stratification May Also Be Studied Among The Non-Hindus In India.

In The Recent Time Some Attention Is Being Paid To The Study Of Social Stratification And Modes Of Social Life Prevailing Among Muslims In India. But A Comprehensive Study Of A Muslim Community In India Is Still Awaited. In This Way The Sociological Study Of Muslim Has Also Come To The Forefront In The Development Of Sociological Literature In India Today. The Important Studies In This Regard Are Those By, Ghaus Ansari (1960), S.C. Misra (1963), M.K. Siddiqui (1976), Zeyauddin Ahmad Ali Ashraf (1959), S.M. Raza, Zarina Bhatty (1962), Hamza Alvi Etc Are Worth Mentioning. Most Important Is The Collection Of Various Papers, Based On Studies Of Social Stratification Among Muslims Living In Various Parts/Regions Of India, By Imtiyaz Ahmad In Early 1970 .

It Must Be Noted Here That Unlike Hinduism, Islam Put Forward An Egalitarian Ideology-Equality Of All Men. It Declares, There Is No Deity But God. This Faith In Oneness Of God Is Meaningless Without The Belief In Oneness Of Man (Cited In Hashim 1970-83) Is The Message Of The Quran. This Statement Of The Quran Indicates That God Created All Men. No Doubt, Theoretically, Islam Preaches Equality But In Practice, The Equalitarian Doctrines Of Islam Have Been Neglected By Its Followers. The Muslims Are Classified In Hierarchical Orders, Not Only In Arabian Society But In Other Countries Also. They Are Divided Into Various Ranks According To The Nature Of The Adjustments Which Islam Made On Coming Into Contact With Regional Traditions And Other Civilizations.

It Is Generally Believed That Islam Emphasis On Egalitarian System. The Holy Quran Says,

O Mankind! We (God) Created You From A Single Pair Of Male And Female; And Made You Into Peoples And Tribes, That Ye May Know Each Other (Not Despise Each Other). Verily, The Most Honored In The Sight Of God Is (He Who Is) The Righteous Among You…..

(The Holy Quran, Surah Al –Hujuraat Verse-13)

This Verse Makes It Quite Clear That Though Islam Accepts Differentiation Based On Gender And Tribe. It Does Not Recognize Social Stratification. But In Reality, The Muslim Community Remains Diversified, Fragmented And As Caste Ridden As Any Other Community Of India (Alam-2003). In Fact, The Levels Of Stratification Witnessed Within The Muslim Community Of India Totally Negate This Quranic Edict.

Imtiyaz Ahmad’S Seminal Work, Caste And Social Stratification Among Muslims In India (1978) And More Recently Ali Anwar’S ‘ Masawat Ki Jung, Pasmanzari Bihar Ka Pasmanda Musalman (2001)’ In Hindi Have Convincingly Demonstrated The Reality Of Caste Among The Indian Muslims.

Though P.C. Aggarwal Cites That Islam Explicitly Rejects Gradation Of Groups And Individuals In Terms Of Birth And The Ideology Of Pure And Impure⁶⁸. It Suggests That The Only Criterion Of Social Evaluation Recognized In Islam Is Religious Piety. M.K.A. Siddiqui Also Notes That The Existence Of Hierarchical Order Generally Receives Over Denial From The Great Traditional Values Of The Muslims⁶⁹. However, There Are Varying Views About The Caste System And Social Stratification Among Muslim In India.

In The Dynamics Of Rural Society, R.K. Mukherjee (1957) Obtained First Hand Information To Provide A Picture Of Both The Muslim And The Hindu Societies Of Bengal. He Says Caste System Is The Basic Pattern Of Both The Communities. In His Attempt To Give A Picture Of Muslim Society He Points Out That Although Islam Strictly Prohibits Any Distinction Between Its Believers But In India Ultimately Caste Differentiation Began To Take Place In These Communities. As A Result, Like The Hindu, The Muslims Began To Prohibit Inter-Marriage And In Some Places Also Inter-Dining Between The Different Categories.

In South India Victor D’Souza (1978) Has Shown Caste Like Ranking Among The Moplahs Of Kerala . To Him The Moplahs Are Divided Into Five Ranked Sanctions, The Malbaris, The Thangals, The Arabis, The Pursalas, And The Ossana . These Form A Social Hierarchy In Which The Thangals Are The Highest And The Ossans Are The Lowest. He Also Quoted, That Social Distance Among These Castes Is Very Great. They Practice Endogamy. In Interaction The Higher Castes Are Given Special Treatment. The Sections Eats Separately, Have Separate Mosques, Separate Religious Organization, And Separate Burial Grounds.

The First Empirical And Pioneering Work On The Muslim Community In India Was Conducted By Ghaus Ansari (1959). His Study Was Aimed At Analyzing Muslim Castes In Utter Pradesh. In His Opinion, The Concept Of Equality Was A Mere Imagination Or Ideology, But In Practice Inequality In Utter Pradesh Was Quite Obvious In That Society, On The Basis Of Birth, Heritage Etc. In Brief, Ghaus Ansari Discovers The Elements Of Caste Among Muslim. The Caste Based Society Developed In Muslim Society Under The Influence Of Hindu Culture. He Concluded That The Muslim Caste System Is A Result Of Hindu Influence. They Acquired It From The Hindus Through Constant And Continuous Cultural Contact.

Another Important Contribution Of Caste Stratification Among Muslims In India Is By P.C. Aggarwal’S Study On Meos Of Rajasthan And Haryana . In His Study Aggarwal , Analyze The Hierarchical Arrangement And Social Stratification Among The Muslims Of Rajasthan. He Finds That The Entire Village Is Divided Into Two Broader Categories Of Unchi Caste (High Caste) And The Kamin (Service Caste). The Third Broader Category Is Of Harijans (Untouchables). Moreover, In Each Of These Three Different Castes, They Do Not Occupy The Same Status.

Another Significant Study Of A Predominantly Muslim Village In Eastern U.P Was Conducted By Imtiyaz Ahmad. Ahmad Found Evidences Reflecting A Trend Of Change In The Traditional Hierarchy And The Conventional Concepts Of Superiority And Inferiority Among Zats And Biradari . He Also Finds Out That, In The Village There Was Two Categories Of Caste; Khanzadas And Julahas . In The Past, As Per Ahmad, Khanzadas Were Dominant Over The Julahas. But When The Julahas Improved Their Economic Condition And Performed Hajj Pilgrimage They Reacted Against This Traditional Practice. But The Khanzadas Stressed On Discrimination. But Gradually This Gulf Narrowed By Julahas, Which Shows A Changing Trend In The Inter-Caste Relations.

Various Sociologists View Caste As A Form Of Social Stratification Among Muslims. Hasan Ali Study Elements Of Caste Among The Muslims On A District In Southern Bihar Saw Endogamy As One Of The Major Attributes Of The Caste System. He Further Mentions That Though Endogamy Is Contrary To Spirit Of Islam, It Is Strictly Followed Among The Local Muslim Ethnic Groups Both In Rural And Urban Settings And Tends To Approximate To The Norms Of Caste Endogamy⁷⁰. This Is Most Important Factor Upholding Biradari Consciousness And Maintaining The Distinctiveness Of Groups Among The Various Muslim Ethnic Groups.

A.R. Momin (1978), Talks Of Ashrafization In Which He Tries To Explain How The Lower Caste Muslim, Whose Status Is Low In The Hierarchy, Try To Imitate The Higher Groups In Their Style Of Living, Customs, Manners And The Like, So That They May Be Ranked With The Top. According To A.R. Momin, The Process Of Ashrafization Is Clearly Seen In The Behavior Of The Wazahs Of Biwindi Who Imitated The Higher Groups In Matters Of Their Way Of Life. Women Folk Of These Lower Castes Took To Purdah And Some Of Them Accumulated Wealth And Thereby Succeeded In Entering Into Marital Alliances With The Kokni Muslim⁷¹.

While Examine Some Unpublished Material On Kashmiri Society We Come Across, T.A. Rather (1992) Unpublished Thesis On Social Stratification In Kashmiri Society; A Case Study Of Village Ruhu . He Observes The Kashmiri Society Can Be Broadly Studied On Basis Of Caste And Class. Caste System In Kashmir Is Radically Different From Caste System In Indian Society. The Rigid Aspect Is Missing And Very Few People Are Ready To Attach Any Importance To Ascribed Status. He Further Argues That Class Is The Basis Of Social Stratification And Most Of The Times Its Basis Are Economic. Dr. Rather Further Argues With The Scholars Who Have Come-Up With Three Fold Caste Divisions Of Kashmiri Society, Syeds, Ulemas, Pirs, At The Top, Dom, Wattals At The Bottom And Rest In The Middle. However, The Process Of Modernization Has Made The Lines Of Demarcation Very Blur And Flexibility Is Quite Visible While Analyzing Social Stratification In Kashmiri Society.

As, It Has Been Already, Mentioned That There Is A Dearth Of Data/Material On Social Stratification Among The Muslims In India As Well As Of Sociologists And Social Anthropologists Who Have Taken Interest In This Study. It Is Therefore, A Matter Of Some Satisfaction That The Collection Of Some Papers In Imtiyaz Ahmad’S Book Has Succeeded In Bringing Together Papers Covering Most Of The Areas Significant Muslim Concentration In India, Excluding Kashmiri Society From Coverage In These Papers Because This Field Is Completely Unexplored So Far. So, This Study Is An Attempt To Explore This Cruel Social Reality.

1.5.1 Relevance Of Theories

There Is A Harvest Of Theories Essaying And Expediting On The Concept Of Social Stratification, But None Of The Theories Encompasses The Whole Cause And Concept Of Social Stratification. Prominent Among These Theories Are Conflict Theory And Functionalist Theory. These Two Approaches Condensed Themselves Only To One Variable Approach. That Is To Say That The Conflict Theory Views Social Stratification As The Outcome Of Economic Inequality In A Society; And Functionalists View That Social Stratification Is Functional To The Society.

But An Eminent Sociologist Max Webber Holds A Different View. He Agreed With Certain Fundamental Features Of Marxist Thought, Particularly With The Crucial Significance Of The Economic Aspects Of Stratification. For Webber, As For Marx, Control Over Property Was A Basic Fact In The Determination Of The Life Chances Of An Individual Or A Class. In Contrast To Marx, However, Webber Added To The Economic Dimension Of Stratification Two Other Dimensions, Power And Prestige. Musing Meticulously Over The Theories As Hinted At Above, The Conflict And Functionalist Theory Are Not Cogent Approaches, To Give Us An All Inclusive Concept Of Social Stratification. On The Other Hand, It Is Max Webber Who Seems To Indicate An Approach To Study Social Stratification Which Takes Care Of So Many Dimensions, Factors Or Variables Into Account. It Is Because Of This Fact That Class, Status And Power Are Prominent Variables Of The District Stratification Here. Thus, The Weberian Approach To Social Stratification Has More Relevance To Our Study. So, The Social Stratification Of District Pulwama Will Be Analyzed Within The Frame Work Of Three Variables I.E., Caste, Class And Power.

1.5.2 Social Stratification In Kashmir

Kashmir Was Peopled Wholly By The Hindus Till The Beginning Of The 14th Century. Majority Of Them Were Converted From Hinduism To Islam After Fourteenth Century. As A Result, All The Race, And Caste Distinctions Of The Past Were Obliterated. Foreigners Also Ruled Over Kashmir For Some Time. Consequently, The Local Population Came To Have A Small Sprinkling Of The Tatar The Tibetan, The Mughal, And The Afghan Families. By The Passage Of Time, However, Promiscuous Intermingling Of These And Other Foreign Elements In The Population Took Place With The Result That The People Of Kashmir Came To Be Spoken Of Either Kashmiri Muslims Or The Kashmiri Brahman’S, Commonly Known As Pandits⁷². The Sub-Divisions Under Both The Muslims And The Brahmans Were However, Numerous But Most Of These Divisions Were Nothing More Than Family Titles Or Personal Epithets, Lacking In The Essential Characteristics Of A Caste.

Caste Exists With Religious Sanction Only Among The Hindus And Sikhs, Buddhists (From Ladakh, To Japan And Korea) And Zoroastrians. Islam (Like Pristine Sikhism And Buddhism) Is Egalitarian. And Yet, As Imtiyaz Ahmad And His Team Demonstrated, Some Social Stratification And Caste Like Features Exist Even In Muslim Societies, Not Just In The Indian Sub-Continent But Also Outside It⁷³.

Thus, The Kashmiri Society Can Also Be Studied On The Basis Of Two Variables, I.E., Caste And Class . It Is Because Of The Structural Similarities Between These Two Units, I.E., India And Kashmir. Caste Is Prevalent In The Kashmiri Society, As Is Prevalent In The Rest Of The Indian Sub-Continent. But, It Has Never Taken So Rigid And Complex Shape As It Did In Rest Of The Country. The Kashmiri Society Is The Muslim Dominated Society And The Religion, Which The Vast Majority Follows, Is Islam. Islam Has No Place For Caste Distinctions, But The Muslim Population Has Remained Divided Into Caste And Sub-Caste From Ancient Times. It Is Mainly Because The Kashmiri Muslims Have Retained Some Pre-Islam Socio - Cultural Features Despite The Conversion. So, We Presume That Some Features Of Hindi Caste Are Prevalent In The Kashmiri Society. According To Majid Husain , A Geographer, The Villages Of Kashmir In Particular And The Kashmiri Society In General Can Be Divided Into The Following Caste Categories;

(1) High Castes (2) Medium Castes (3) Lower Castes ⁷⁴

The Higher Castes Of Kashmir Are Syeds Who Sat At The Very Top, Followed By The Ulemas , The Mughals And The Pathans (The Correct Word Is Pushtuns)⁷⁵ In That Order. They Usually Justify Their Positions Or They Are Exalted Because They Are The Descendants Of Prophet Muhammadpbuh, That They Are The People Who Have Brought Islam In The Valley, And That They Are The Only People Who Were Having Good Religious Knowledge. The Second Higher Caste Namely The Sheikhs Are Mostly The Descendants Of The Four Righteous Caliphs (Siddiqui, Faruqui, Usmanis, And Umavis And Alvis ), And Are Also Of Arab Origin. The Sheikhs Comprised Of Pirzadas, Babazadas, And Wani’S Among The Respectable. And There Are The Two Great Arab Clans Closest To Prophet Muhammadpbuh; The Ansaris , And The Qureshis^[76] . So, The Masses In General And Illiterate In Particular Giving Good Respect And Treat Them As Superior Human Beings. This Particular Class Of People Made The Religious Monopoly As A Tool For Discrimination Against Others. The Rest Of The Castes Were Dominated By These Castes And Have Given Them Equal Chance Neither In Education, Nor In Administration. However, With The Spread Of Education Among Masses, This Superiority Started To Decline. But The Restriction On Marriage Was There From Ancient Times And Is Very Much Practicing In The Present Day Life. In Kashmir These Upper Castes Are Still Endogamous And Do Not Prefer To Marry Outside.

So Far As, The Middle Castes Are Concerned They Are All Exogamous And Have No Concept Of Purity And Pollution. In Rural Set-Up These Castes Were Engaged In Agricultural Activities With Most Of People Having Land Of Their Own, And In Urban Setting They Were The People Who Were Engaged In Handicraft, Embroidery, Tourism, And People Working In Government Offices⁷⁷. Besides, The Upper, And Medium Castes, There Are Doms, Galawans, Chaupan, Bhands, And Watils , Treated As The Inferior Castes. So, There Is A Tacit Division. On The One Hand Are The Syeds , The Afghans , The Mughals , And Converts From The Hindu Upper Castes (Muslim Rajputs And The Sheikhs), On The Other Hand, Are Converts From The Former Hindu Under Class. Fauq Called Them As The Adna-Aqwam (Lower Castes). Perhaps We Can Call Them The Underprivileged Sections Of Society. The More Cumbersome But Also More Politically Correct Expression Castes Associated With Culture And Specialized Professions⁷⁸.

Ii. Usually, There Is Some Demarcation Line Between With The Haves And The Have-Nots. Broadly Speaking, The Kashmiri Society Must Be Treated As The Class- Based Society. It Goes Back To The Mughal Period In Which Large Chakks Of Land Were Granted As Jagirs With Property Rights To Those Who Carried Favors With The Kings.

Broadly, Speaking Before 1947 The Kashmiri Society Was Divided Into Four Classes. First, The Jagirdars, Who Were Either From The Royal Class Or Close To Royalty. This Class Comprised Mainly Of Pandits Of Kashmiri Origin Or Dogras Of Jammu. They Were Lords Of Large Quantity Of Land, Which Consisted Of Even Many Villages. These Jagirs Were Bestowed Upon Them By The Kings For Some Deed Of Theirs In Times Of War Or Peace. Second The Government Servants Who Were The Real Manipulators In Political And Social Affairs. This Class Was Also Composed Of Pandits And Dogras Who Were Mostly Educated. The Members Of This Class Were Higher Ranking Officials Very Close To The Kind As Well As Lower Grade Government Employees. There Was A Small Number Of Muslims In Government Services, Mostly Holding Lower Ranks. This Class Also Composed Of Governmental Functionaries, Like Patwari’S And Non-Governmental Functionaries Like Mugdams Who Were The Rapport Agents Between The Masses And The Government. Third Class Was Dominantly Muslim In Composition Like Kashkars (Agriculturists ), Or Peasants. The Land Held By Jagirdars Was Allotted In The Name To These Peasants Who Were Asked To Cultivate It For The Jagirdars. After A Hard Toil, They Used To Get A Meager Portion Of The Crop, With Which They Could Not Even Make Both Ends Meet. This Class Was Altogether Poor And Their Life Conditions Were Miserable. This Category Of People Was Also Used To Begaar To Carry On Foot The Garrison To The Far Flung Areas Of: Tibet And Gilgat And Not Paid Even A Single Penny. Fourth, Petty Artisans Indulgent In Shawl Making , Gubba Making And Carpet Making And Number Of Them Were Carpenters, Blacksmiths, Tailors, And Other Craftsmen. This Class Was Relatively Better Placed Economically. After 1947, This Scenario, Changed Altogether, The Jagirdari System Was Abolished, And The Land Reforms Act Was Passed In 1948 And Implemented In 1952. The Land Was Provided To Peasants, Consequently The Monopoly Of Jagirdars Diminished. It Was Partly Also Because The Muslim Youth In Kashmir Were Getting Higher Education Outside Kashmir And Emerging As A Socio-Political Force Inside Kashmir. In The Post-1947 Decades Business Flourished And Attained New Heights. As A Result The Artisans And Business Class Conditions Improved And Latter On Became Prosperous. This Trend Continues Till Date.

1.6 The Study

Studying Human Life And Human Society Is And Has Been A Particular Subject Of Some Of The Prolific Philosophers And Intellectuals. The Proposed Study Is On A Simple But An Important Topic I.E., Social Stratification. The Topic Has Been Dealt With Many A Time Before But The Researchers Have Either Concluded On Undertaking Limited Group Of People Or Have Not Highlighted All The Facts Related To It. Thus, There Is Always A Scope For More And More Research On This Particular Topic.

Though A Number Of Research Studies Have Been Conducted Throughout India Which Has Tried To Highlight The Patterns And Dynamics Of Social Stratification, Yet No Such Systematic Study Has Been Conducted Intensively And Extensively On Kashmir, Barring A Few Studies Which Give A Historical Account Of Social Stratification In Kashmir. The Present Study Will Primarily Focus On The Patterns Of Social Stratification In Contemporary Times In Kashmir And The Changes If And That Have Taken Place. Present Study Is An Attempt To Explore The Patterns Of Social Stratification In Kashmir General And District Pulwama In Particular. The Area Of Study Is District Pulwama; Which Has Been Taken For The Study Because It Is Centrally Located In The Valley Of Kashmir. This Particular Area Resembles With Other Parts Of The Kashmir Valley. This Study Will Enable Us To Generalize About The Patterns Of Social Stratification In The Kashmiri Society In General And District Pulwama In Particular.

1.6.1 Hypothesis

Like In All Human Societies Of The World, The Kashmiri Society Has Developed Certain Pattern Of Social Stratification. The Existing Pattern Of Social Stratification In The Kashmir Has Under Gone Certain Degree Of Qualitative As Well As Quantitative Change Mainly Due To The Impact Of Process Of Modernization, Secularization, Spread Of Education And New Found Economic Prosperity.

1.6.2 Objectives

The Specific Objectives Under Which The Present Study Reveals Are As Under:

- To Understand The Theoretical Perspective Of Social Stratification.
- To Analyze The Past And Present Pattern Of Social Stratification In The Kashmir.
- To Arrive At An In-Depth Sociological Understanding Of The Stratification System In Kashmir.
- To Know The Impact And Factors Responsibility For The Change In Social Stratification.
- To Give A Sociological Critique Of The Stratification Scenario As Has Arisen In The District Pulwama.

1.6.3 Universe And Sample Of The Study

The Universe Or The Population Is Aggregate Of All Units, Possessing Certain Specific Characteristics Of Which The Sample Seeks To Draw Conclusions. The Universe Of The Study Means Exact Area Where From The Individuals For The Sample Are Selected. The Universe For This Study Is The District Pulwama Of The Valley Kashmir.

The Choice Of District Pulwama As The Universe Of The Study Was Made Because This Area Is Completely Unexplored And No Such Has Been Conducted Which Will Provide Information Regarding The Patterns Of Social Stratification And Secondly, Researchers Personal Acquaintance With The Place And Familiarity With Its Languages And People’S Way Of Life.

Pulwama Taken Away From District Anantnag Has Come In To Being In 1979 . According To 2001 Census, The Total Population Of The District Was 6.25lakhs, Consisting Of 3.35 Lakhs Males And 3.17 Lakhs Females. The Total Literacy Rate Of The District Is 49.60%, In Which 60.70% Are Males And 37.70% Are Females. District Pulwama Is Also Comprised Of Four Tehsil’S Viz, Pulwama , Tral , Pampore And Awantipora . It Has 319 Inhabited Villages.

1.6.4 Sample Of Study

District Pulwama Comprises Of 4 Tehsil’S And Is Divided Into 5 Blocks. In Order To Make The Study Systematic, One Tehsil Was Selected I.E., Out Of 4 Tehsil’S, Tehsil Pulwama Was Selected In Order To Make The Study A Systematic One. This Tehsil / Block Were Selected As The Unit Of Study, Because It Is Inhibited By Heterogeneous Group Of People Belonging To Various Castes And Classes.

Pulwama Is Also A Block And Comprises Of 57 Villages And 45 Panchayat Halqa’S. Out Of 45 Halqa’S, 12 Panchayat Halqa’S Have Been Taken As A Representative Sample. From These 12 Panchayat Halqa’S A Sample Of 240 Household Were Selected By Using The Stratified Random Sampling Technique. The Respondents Were Selected From Different Caste And Income Groups. However Elder Male Remained The Best Choice During The Field Survey.”

1.7 District Pulwama

In Early Times, Pulwama Town Was Known As Panwangam. It Was A Part Of District Anantnag, And Came In To Being In The Year 1979, In The Large Interests Of Maintenance Of Balanced Development Of The Area.

Much Has Been Written About This Piece Of Land That Has Given Birth To Many Legendaries Viz, Habba Khatoon , Lailta Ditya , Mahjoor , And Others. The District Is Also Origin Of Folk Tales For Example, The Famous Love Legend Heemal-Nagrai , Is Believed To Have Taken Birth Here. Nagrai Was A Serpent Prince Who Fell In Love With A Damsel, Heemal . The Spring Where The Lovers Weaved There Love Life Is Found Near Shopian. The Remains Of This Place Still Existing At The Place.

The District Is Reported To Be One Of The Pretty Spots On The Earth, Because Of Its Congenial Climate, Innumerable Springs, Streams, Weather-Falls, Fragrant Flowers Delicious Fruits And Other Natural Sceneries. It Is Also A Resting Place For Adventure Tourists. The District Pulwama Is Situated At An Average Height Of 1,638 Meters Above The Sea Level, With The Geographical Area Of 1,398 Square Kms. The District Pulwama Comprised Of 554 Villages, Which Were Grouped In 5 Tehsil’S Viz, Shopian, Pulwama, Tral, Pampore And Awantipora. Now, Again The District Has Been Bifurcated In Two Parts Viz, District Shopian, And District Pulwama. Now, In District Pulwama There Are Four Tehsil’S Namely, Pulwama , Tral , Pampore And Awantipora . The Total Number Of Villages Comes Down To 319 With 4 Community Development Blocks And A Part Of Keller Block. The Reporting Area Of This District Has Been Reduced To 0.67 Lakh Hectares From 0.98 Hectares After Creation Of The New Hill District, Shopian .

The District Pulwama Is Situated 32 Km’S From Srinagar. It Is Surrounded In The North By District Srinagar, In The West By District Poonch Of Jammu Province And District Budgam , And In The East By District Anantnag Of Kashmir Region Of The State. The Total Geographical Area Of The District Pulwama Is 1.398 Square Kilometers, Of Which 1011 Square Kilometers Are Covered By Forests. As Per 2001 Census, The Total Population Of The District Was 6.25 Lakhs Person, Consisting Of 3, 35,544 Persons Male And 3, 17,063 Persons Females In 2001.

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

Source: 2001 Census J&Amp;K .

A Ccording To 2001 Census, The Density Of Population Of District Pulwama Was 467 Per Square Kilometer. The District Is Also Having 236 Panchayats. The Total Schedule Caste And Schedule Tribe Population Of Pulwama In 2001 Was.

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

Source: 2001 Census J&Amp;K

1.7.1 Religions

Like Other Districts, Pulwama Is Also Muslim Dominated District. Here Muslims Comprise Of 97.61%, Followed By Sikhs 1.35%, And Hindus 0.93%, Christians 0.10%, Buddhists 0.01% And Others 0%. The Table Below Shows The Religion Wise Population Figures.

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

Source: Digest Of Statistics (2006-07) Directorate Of Economics And Statistics Government Of Jandk-Dos-32-07.

1.7.2 Education

Educationally District Pulwama Is Also Competing With Other Districts Of J&Amp;K. The Total Literacy Rate Of The District Is 49.60%, It Is 60.70% In Respect Of Males And 37.70% In Respect Of Females. The Total Number Of Literates As Per 2001 Census Was 2, 81,518, In Which 1, 78,170 Are Males And 1, 03,384 Are Females.

The Total Number Of Literates At Rural Area Was 2, 42,182, In Which 1, 53,331 Are Males And 88,831 Are Females. The Total Number Of Literate At Urban Level Was 39,336 In Which 28,819 Are Males And 14,517 Females Respectively. The Table Below Will Show The Educational Level Attained In 2001 By District Pulwama.

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

Source: Digest Of Statistics (2006) Directorate Of Economics And Statistics Government Of J&Amp;K.

The Above Census Report Clearly Indicates That Education Has Been Taken Seriously By Most Of The Families In District Pulwama Now. However, The Children From Poor Economic Background Are Not Able To Carry On Their Studies In Spite Of Free Education In The Government Schools. But Still The Literacy Rate Is Shooting Up In The Comparative Sense.

1.7.3 Economy

Agriculture Is The Main Occupation Of The People And Plays An Important Role In The Economy Of The District. The Agriculture Products Like Paddy, Oil Seeds, Fodder, Saffron And Milk Are The Main Contributors To The Gross Domestic Product (Gdp) Of The District. Area Sown More Than Once Is About 2,600 Hectares And The Productivity Of The Land In The District Is Higher Than Any Other District In The State.

District Pulwama Is Also Famous For The Cultivation Of Saffron Which Is Mainly Grown In Karewa Lands Of Pampore, Kakapora And Pulwama Block. The Area Under Saffron Cultivation During 2006-07 Was 2’600 Hectares. Among The Fruits, Apple, Almonds, Walnut And Cherry Are The Important One Produced In The District.

But As The Population Went On Increasing, The Land Could Hardly Fulfill The Needs Of The People. So, They Come Out Of Their District In The Nearby District/Other States Of Indian And Indulged In The Broader Economic Activities Prevalent In These Areas. Education Was Another Factor Responsible For This Change In Economic Activities. In The Recent Past, We Can Say That The Economy Of The District Shifted From Agriculture To Trade, Business And Government Services, Partially If Not Fully. Agriculture Has Certainly Become A Part-Time Job Of The People Now. The District Has The Districting Of Having The State’S Largest Cement Plant Viz, J&Amp;K Cement Limited Khrew With A Capacity Of 1200m, Been Cement Per Day. In This District Two Important Projects Have Been Taken Up For Execution During Current Years Namely, State Entrepreneur Development Institute (Edi) And International Trade Centre (Itc). Because Of All That The District Is Called Rice Bowl Of Kashmir For Maximum Production Of Rice In J&Amp;K State.

So Far As The Political Atmosphere Of This District Is Concerned, It Has Never Proved An Exception To The General Political Trends Prevailing In The Valley, Before 1947 When The Valley Was Under The Maharajas Rule; A Few Influential Individuals Associated With The Regime And Exploited The Masses. It Was Because The Governmental Decisions Were Taken By These Individuals Who Were Directly Or Indirectly Linked With The Regime. Later On, When The People Of Kashmir Started Fighting Against The Maharaja, The People Of District Pulwama Also Participated In That Movement Actively. Again, A Class For Itself Emerged When Kashmir Got Rid Of The Feudal Rule. These People Were Mostly The Workers Of National Conference. Later On, The General Political Awakening Led To The Crystallization Of Two Political Classes In The Valley Of Kashmir, One That Was Loyal To The Government And The Other Class Which Was Antagonistic To Other Class, The Class Loyal To The Government, Has Been The Dominate Class In The Valley And It Has Always Exploited The Masses For Their Vested Interests.

Social Structure Of The District Pulwama Resembles In Almost All Respects To The Rest Of The Parts Of Kashmir. But, The Social Structure Of The Kashmiri Society By Dint Of Its Geographical Location, Cultural Distinction And So On, Displays Certain Characteristics Which Though Resemble, To A Great Extent, With The Broad Structural Characteristics Of The Indian Society, Yet Differs From It In Many Important Ways. There Are Certain Historical Factors Which Are Mostly Responsible For The Peculiar Social Structure Prevailing In Kashmir. One Is The Influence Of Different Non-Kashmiri Rulers, Who Ruled Kashmir, On The Social Climate. Second, Is The Mass Conversion Of Hindus To Islam And Strict Adherence To The Laid Down Principles Of Islam. Third, Is The Trade, Geographical And Historical Links With The Central Asian Region. These Factors Contribute Mostly To The Prevailing Social Structure In Kashmir And That Is Why It Is Peculiarly Different From Rest Of The Country.

Present Age Is Rightly Called The Age Of Information Technology And Hardly Any Part Of The Globe Has Remained Where Its Impact Is Not Felt. This Information Technology And Globalization Had Also A Fair Amount Of Impact On Rural Areas This Led To The Development Of Roads, Sound Transport Facilities, Prompt Communication, Recreation And Entertainment Facilities. The Roads Of The District Pulwama Are Pakka Roads And The Communication Facilities Are Available At A Half Distance. Every Village In District Has Been Provided Drinking Water Facilities Long Back And So Far As Electricity, Every Part Is Electrified. Majority Of The Houses Are Pakka In This Small Piece Of Land.

The People In The District Are Differentiated On Various Lines. It Is Differentiated On The Basis Of Religions, Knowledge, Occupation, Large Size Of Land Holding, And Political Affiliation With Different Political Parties, Mode Of Living Or The Education. Generally, People Are Stratified On The Basis Of Caste, Class, And Power. Although The Village Society Is Not Streamlined On The Basis Of Caste, The Caste Is Still Playing Its Role In Different Matters Of Day-To-Day Life.

The People Who Have Same Economic Interests Form A Particular Class. These People Are Mostly The People Who Have Large Size Land Holdings, Trade And Business, People Working In Bureaucracy And So On. However, The People Affiliated With The Different Political Parties Have Always Remained The Dominate Class And This Minority Group Has Always Exploited The Masses In The Pulwama For Their Own Vested Interests.

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

1.7.4 Tools And Techniques

After The Selection Of The Sample The Methods Or Techniques To Be Used By The Researcher For The Collection Of Empirical Data Was Selected. For Conducting This Present Study, The Method Of Interview Schedule Was Used. The Secondary Sources, Which Included, Books, Journals, Magazines, Census Reports, Official Statistics And Newspapers Were Also Used In Order To Have A Comprehensive Understanding About The Phenomenon Under Study.

1.7.5 The Collection Of Data

Collection Of Data For The Study Under Reference Began With Secondary Sources. The Information Gathered From Secondary Sources Provided An In-Depth Understanding Of The Historical Account Of The Patterns Of Social Stratification And Forms Of Inequality Prevalent In Kashmiri Society. These Sources Proved Fruitful In Building Some Theoretical Assumptions And Parameters For The Method Of Inquiry. Before Going To The Field And Actually Interviewing People The Study Began With Pilot Study Which Starts Before The Field Work, For Pilot Study, Researcher Took 50 Families From Different Areas, And Caste Group To Know The Real Patterns Of Social Stratification Present In District Pulwama And Also Understands The Changes That Have Taken Place In The Social Stratification Of Pulwama District. The Analysis Of The Pilot Study Helped The Researcher To Form The Basis Of An Outline Including The Desirable Items To Be Included In The In-Depth Study Of Social Stratification In Pulwama District. On The Basis Of This Pilot Study, A Sample Of 240 Households Was Selected Accordingly. Thereafter, Field Work Was Carried Out By The Researcher. The Researcher Went Personally To Each And Every Respondent’S And Recorded The Responses To Each Of The Question. The Researcher Endeavored To Meet The Respondents In Their Own Villages.

While Asking The Questions And Recording The Responses From The Respondents, The Researcher Tried To Observe Their Attitudes, Approach, Behavior And The Way Of Speaking. This Helped The Researcher In Gaining The Primary As Well As Secondary Information. Finally The Research Findings Were Written In An Elaborate, As A Report.

Thus, The Information Collected From Primary And Secondary Sources About The Patterns Of Social Stratification In District Pulwama Was Put In Pre-Determined Theoretical Framework Which Became The Basis Of Our Observation In The Findings. These Findings Were Analyzed In The Sociological Framework And Conclusion Were Drawn In Relation To The Findings On Which Hypothesis Were Based. Researcher Was Also Conscious About The Bias Which Generally Creeps In The Study Framework. Hence, By The Scientific Method Such Problems Were Solved And The Desired Goals Were Achieved.

1.8 Findings

The District Pulwama As A Representative Type Of The Kashmir Society Resembles With The Broader Social Structure Prevailing In The Valley Of Kashmir. The Universe Of The Study Is Stratified On The Basis Of ‘ Caste, Class And Power’ . But At Present, The Individuals Here Are Differentiated On The Basis Of Income, Landholding, Occupation, Education And Power.

The Analysis Of The Information Gathered From Secondary Sources As Well As Primary Sources I.E., Responses Of The People, Revealed That Social Stratification In District Pulwama May Be Explained In Terms Of ‘Caste, Class, And Power’. Theoretically Speaking, Islam As A Form Of Religion Has Never Uphold Or Allowed Caste, Creed, And Colour As The Basis Of Social Hierarchy / Inequality. But From The Empirical Point Of View, Muslims All Over The World And In This District Too Are Stratified, In Some Societies, Stratified On The Basis Of Caste (Indian Sub-Continent), In Other Societies On The Basis Of Social And Economic Standing (Developed Societies). So, The District Pulwama Being Part Of The Broader Indian Sub-Continent Is Also Stratified On The Basis Of Caste, Class, And Power.

1.8.1 Caste Stratification

Caste First Came To Be Identified As A Principle Of Social Stratification Among Hindus. It Has Remained A Dominant Feature Of Social Stratification In The Indian Sub-Continent. Sociologists Have Always Tried To Explain And Analyze The Social Stratification In India In Terms Of Caste. Moreover, While Analyzing Systems Of Social Stratification In Other Religions And Societies, They Tend Quite Unconsciously To Follow A Culture-Specific Definition Of The Institution And Base Their Discussion On The Hindu Phenomenon. The Kashmiri Society, Being A Part Of The Broader Indian Society, Has Also Been Influenced By This Caste System. In Pre-Islamic Period, The Valley Was Wholly Peopled With Hindus, In Which The Brahmans Were At The Top Of The Social Hierarchy Because They Were Considered The Most Knowledgeable Person. They Enjoyed The Superiority And Exploited The Lower Castes (Shudra ) For Their Vested Interests. But It Was Only After The 14the Century, When Muslim Saints Reached Here And Started Their Mission By Converting The People (Hindus ) In To The Islamic Religion. They Taught The Basic Philosophy Of Islam, Which Is Based On The Equality Of All. It Is Because Of This Egalitarian Philosophy, Most Of ‘Pandits’ Convert Into Muslims And Had A Sigh Of Relief Of The Oppression Which They Had Faced In The Typical Hindu Caste System. The Islamic Religion, When We See From The Strict Theoretical Sense, Is Without The Caste Barriers. In Fact, It Negates The Very Notion Of Caste Stratification. It Generally Emphasizes On Egalitarian System, The Holey Quran Says,

O Mankind! We (God) Created You From A Single Pair Of Male And Female And Made You Into Peoples And Tribes, That Ye May Know Each Other (Not Despise Each Other). Verily, The Most Honored In The Sight Of God Is (He Who Is) The Righteous Among You…..

(Surah Al-Hujuraat Verse-13)

This Verse Makes It Quite Clear That Though Islam Accepts Differentiation Based On Gender And Tribe. It Does Not Recognize Social Stratification. It Clearly Opposes To Draw The Line Of Demarcation On The Basis Of Race, Color, Creed And Caste. But, At The Same Time, It Is True Only Up To The Theoretical Understanding Of Islam. But In Reality, The Muslim Community Remains Diversified, Fragmented And As Caste-Ridden As Any Other Community Of India. Practically, The Situation In The Muslim Society Is Somewhat Different. Muslims Too Are Stratified On The Basis Of Caste. There Had Been Always An Element Of Superiority Present With Those Castes Which Are Considered To Be At Top, And A Kind Of Inferiority Attached To Those Castes Which Are Considered To Be At The Bottom.

The Analysis Of The Study Revealed That The Element Of Caste Is Also Present In The Valley Of Kashmir As Well As In The District Pulwama. The Inhabitants Of The Pulwama Generally Distinguished Between The “Higher Castes” And “Lower Castes”. More Than 20 Castes Are Present In District Pulwama Viz, Syeds, Sheikh, Wani, Dar, Ganaie, Bhatt, Magray, Naik, Rather, Tantray, Thokar, Wagay, Malik, Paday, Sofi, Tali, Hajam, And Watal’S . But In District Pulwama The Caste Stratification Is Not As Rigid As In The Rest Parts Of India.

The Analysis Also Showed That The Traditional Social Structure Of District Pulwama, The Syeds, Pirs, Mughals, And Ulemas , Used To Dominate The Life Of Masses As Whole. They Usually Justify Their Position On The Grounds That They Are Decedents Of Prophet Muhammadpbuh And Were Having Good Religious Knowledge. So, The Masses Of Pulwama In General Were Giving Them Good Respect And Treated Them As Superior Human Beings. It Is Because Of This Religious Knowledge, Foreign Ancestry And Social Prestige They Occupied The Top Most Position In The Hierarchical Arrangement.

While Interacting With The Respondents In The Field, Majority Of The People Believed That Their Society Is Caste-Ridden And Agrees That Their Society Is Stratified On The Basis Of Caste. Syed’S, Pirs And Ulemas, Are The Dominant Caste In Pulwama And Constitute A Little Portion Of The Total Population. They Are Dominant Because Of Their Caste Name, Religious Knowledge And Socio-Economic And Political Status. But, As Per My Personal Observation, They Are Superior Only At Their Own Level, Not In The Eyes Of General Masses.

The Simple And Random Survey In The Pulwama, Carried Out During The Course Of Field Work Revealed That The Element Of Caste Is Strongly Present In This Society, Only At The Time Of Marriage. The Caste Consideration Still Persists Only In The Institution Of Marriage. In Pulwama 27% People Prefer To Be Called By Their Caste Names They Belong, While 73% People Prefer To Be Called By Their Names. This Indicates That These People Are Not Caste Conscious. This Clearly Indicates That Caste System Is Losing Importance.

The Analysis Further Indicates That People Who Prefer To Be Called By Their Caste Names Are Above The Age-Group Of 45 Years, And Were Mostly Illiterate And Ignorant. While Those Who Prefer To Be Called By Their Names Were Literate And Economically Well Off. Which Indicates That Old Generation Is Highly Caste-Conscious, But It Is Losing Ground Among The Present Generation, Which Leads Us To Say That Present Or Existing Patterns Of Social Stratification As Changing. But, At The Same Time, Caste Still Plays A Vital Role Here, At The Time Of Marriage. It Is High At The Time Of Selection Of The Mates. Though Marriages Are Performed Primarily On The Basis Of Socio-Economic And Political Status Of The Family, But The Caste Consideration Also Remains Alive. That Is Why, Any Family In The Pulwama Will Not Accept To Give Their Daughters To The Lower Caste People (Wattals, Kumhars, Nangars, Dums, Wagay And Najaris And So On). As Per Respondents, It Is Done Mainly Because Of Hereditary Occupations Of These Castes. The Watils Was Performing The Job Of Sanitation, Shoe-Making And Skin The Dead Animals. The Kumhar Caste Was Linked With Pottery Occupation, While Nangar Caste Was Engaged In Different Occupations Like , Cutting Of Hair, Beggars, Middle Man Etc And The Wagay Caste Was Doing The Job Of Cattle-Grazing, And Collection Of Milk, While This Castes Still Engaged With This Occupation. The Ganaie And Thokar (Dums) Caste Has Given It Up Decades Back. But, The Social Standing Of These Castes Is Determined By Their Occupation Whether They Perform It Or Not. These Castes Have Improved Their Socio-Economic Conditions, There Is No Restrictions On Inter-Dining Or Interaction Among Or Between Various Castes In The District;

The Proceeding Explanation About The Caste In Pulwama Makes It Clear That Caste Play A Significant Role In Stratifying The District Pulwama. However, The Lower Castes Prevailing Here Have Consciously Or Unconsciously Resisted The Changes Which Occurred In The Broader Set Up Of The Pulwama. The Reason For This Is That They Have Not Taken Modern Education Seriously, As Is The Case With Other Castes In The District, Although Their Economic Condition Improved Slightly But Have Not Been Able To Keep Pace With Rest Of Three Castes In Different Fields. Modern Education Has Also Consolidated The Position Of Some Castes Which Were Previously At A Low Position. At Present, Belonging To A Particular High Caste Indicates A Sense Of Honor And Respect. But, It Should Correspond With The Sound Economic Position. Thus, From The Above Findings, We Can Say That Pulwama Was Stratified On The Basis Of Caste In Which Syeds Were The Only Caste Which Dominated The Social, Economic And Political Life Of The Society.

1.8.2 Class Stratification

Apparently, The District Pulwama Appears A Homogenous One. But When We Go Deep And Interacted With Respondents In The Field, It Revealed That This Is Not Stratified On The Basis Of Caste Only But Also On The Basis Of Class, In Which, Some Are Placed At The Top, Some At The Middle And Rest At The Bottom. This Three-Tier Pattern Of Stratification Is Explained In Terms Of Class, Particularly An Economic Class. This Economic Class Comprised The People Who Have Large Assets Of Land, Coupled With Large Or Small Business, Trade And Government Service. Majority Of The Respondents In District Pulwama Revealed That To Have Large Landholdings In The Past Differentiated One Family From Another. But At Present, This Landholding Criterion Has Been Shedded By The People. In The Present Era, The Most Important Indicator Of Social Stratification In Pulwama Is Monthly Income That May Be From Business, Trade, Or Government Service. Most Of The Respondent’S Argued That It Is One’S Income/Wealth Which Determines His Social Position. Now, It Is The Economic Asset Which Keeps An Individual Or A Family At The Top Or At Bottom Of The Social Ladder. It Was Felt During The Course Of Study, That There Has Always Been The Concept Of Dominant Class Prevalent In The Society. The Nature Of Class In The Past And At Present Is Given Below;

Nature Of Class In The Past

Abbildung In Dieser Leseprobe Nicht Enthalten

From The Above Table Which Is Based On The Responses Of The Respondents, It Is Clear That The Traditional Class Structure Of District Pulwama Was Reflected By The Agrarian Class Structure. The Economy Of The Pulwama Division Was Based Primarily Upon Agriculture And Hence The Relation Of Production Depends Upon The Process Of Agriculture. Such Categories Include, Landlords, Cultivators, Tenants And Agricultural Labourers. So, This Indicates That In Pulwama Class Stratification Was Based Upon The Landholding. In District Pulwama, Those Who Own The Land Was Called Zamindar’S (Landlords) And Those Who Don’T Were Called As Nangars (Landless/Serf’S). This System Of Class Stratification Was Known As Shaksi Or Shaksiyaatic Raj (Feudalism), In Which The Zamindar’S (Landlords) Were At The Top And The Nangars (Landless Peasants) Were At The Bottom.

It Was Only After The Independence (1947) Feudal System In Kashmir Vanished With The Distribution Of Land Among The Peasants. The Landlord Lost Their Land But Not Their Prestige, Political Affiliation And Influence. Pertinent To Say New Avenues For Their Upliftment And Occupying Higher Position Were Looked For By These Landlords. On The Other Hand A New Class Of Zamindar’S (Earlier Peasants) Came Into Being, Whose Sole Source Of Income Was Based On Agriculture. As Per Respondents, The Land Reform Acts Provided An Opportunity For Them To Improve Their Economic Conditions To The Great Extent. At Present, The Situation In The District Pulwama Is Radically Different. The Technology Used In Agriculture, Impact Of Industrialization, And Other Related Developments Have Greatly Influenced The Life In The District, Especially The Economy. This Situation Has Tremendously Changed The Traditional Set-Up. It Has Rather Shaken The Traditional Class Structure And New Classes Have Emerged. At Present, As Per Respondents, Land Holding Is No More Considered The Only Source Of Income Or The Sole Basis For Status Symbol. In Actuality, It Is Trade, Business And Rather Monthly Income, Which Matters A Lot. So, The Existential Reality Reveals Clearly That The Criteria For Status Have Changed Absolutely And People Evaluate Others Primarily By This Criterion. The People Treat The Land Holdings As An Additional Source Of Income.

Manpower And Political Approach Is Now Being Shared By All The Classes. On The Ground Level Economic Development Resulted Only In Rise Of Living Standards Of People Irrespective Of Any Change In The Thinking Of People. The Dependence Of Lower Classes On Middle Class And Of Middle Classes On Upper Class Depleted To The Large Extent. But Consciously Or Unconsciously People In District Pulwama Still Follow A Traditional Path Especially When It Comes To Marriages. No Upper Class Family Accepts A Lower Class Family For A Marriage Relation And Vice-Versa. Any Such Attempt By The Members Of These Families Is Severely Dealt With And Mostly Ends On Drastic Results. In District Pulwama, The New Generation Is Not Conscious Of Any Social Hierarchy But The Elements Of Social Stratification Show Their Presence Only In Selection Of Mates. Traditionally The Young One Of A Syed Family Felt In One Or The Other Way Superior And Tried To Make Sure That His Status Is Felt By Others. But The Condition Has Changed Because The Syed, Who Were Respected For Their Religious Knowledge And Piety, Has Now Been Acquired By The Non-Syed Class, Even By Lower Classes Like, Kumhars, Sofi’S And Watils. Though, Syeds Are Still Respected In The Social Hierarchy.

The Respondents Revealed That The Phenomenon Of Physical Strength Has Its Roots In Our Society. The Family With Good Man-Power Was Influential In Decision Making In The Villages In Past. It Is Still Present This Time. Families With Good Landholding And Physical Strength Are Dominant Families.

There Are Exceptional Cases Of Changes, Some Liberal People Have Done Or Motivated Many A People For Inter-Caste/Class Marriage, But The Criteria For It Also Remains Either Economic Conditions Or Political Affiliation Or Castes With Similar Social Standing.

1.8.3 Power Stratification

An Analysis Revealed That There Had Been A Correlation Between The Landownership And The Power. People Who Were Possessing Large Size Of Land Were At The Same Time Monopolizing Power In The Pulwama. The Bases Of Power In The Traditional Society Consisted Of Land And The Ritualistic Position In The Caste Hierarchy. The People Holding Large Size Of Land Were Called Zaildars . These Zaildars Were Closely Linked With The Influential Members Of The Maharaja’S Government In General And With The Revenue Department In Particular. This Category Of People Was At The Top Of The Prestige Hierarchy. This Class In The Village Was Not From Any Particular Caste. However, All Of Them Were Directly Associated With The Land Ownership. However, They Dominated Every Spheres Of Village Life. On The Other Hand, The Masses Were Either The Landless Laborers Or The People Who Possessed Some Land But Were Working As Laborer’S In Order To Earn The Livelihood. They Possessed No Power At All. The Masses Were Subjected By The Small Minority And The Reason For This Was Economy. The ‘ Zaildar ’ Was The Absolute Authority In The Village And The Masses Always Obeying His Orders To Avoid The Harm Which He Was Capable Of Inflicting. This Pattern Of Power Structure In The District Pulwama Continued Up To 1947. The Political Climate Of India As Well As Of Kashmir Is Changing Fast Since The Very Beginning Of The 20th Century. The Nationalist Movement And Other Peasant And Trade Movements Have Been Of Vital Significance In The Society. Along With Struggle For Freedom, The Leaders And Masses In General Also Struggled For The Emancipation Of Women And For Improvement In Conditions Of Education. This Improvement In Literacy And The Participation Of Women In Outdoor Activities Also Contributed To The Development Of Political Consciousness Among Indian Masses In General And People Of Kashmir In Particular. After The Achievement Of Independence The Parliamentary Form Of Democracy Facilitated The Common People To Participate In Politics Not Only As A Voter But Also As A Candidate As Well As Campaigner Or Organizer Of Election Campaign. Because Of That, Drastic Changes Were Experienced In The Power Structure Soon. The Major Reason For This Change Was The Abolition Of Zamindari System And The Introduction Of Land Reforms Act In 1952. Now, The Masses Of Pulwama Are No More Tenants Of Landlords And Their Economic Conditions Started Improving Gradually. As A Result Of Their Developments, Radical Changes Occurred In The Political Structure Of District Pulwama. Now A New Category Of Power Holders Emerged In The Village, Which Comprised Of People Directly Affiliated With Different Political Parties.

1.8.4 Changes Of Social Stratification

After Independence And Contact With Developed Countries, Tremendous Changes Have Been Experienced In The Overall Structure Of The Kashmir Society. Such Changes Had Left No Area Unaffected. In Rural Areas As Compared To Urban Areas The Change Has Been A Bit Slow. It Is Because Of Illiteracy, Ignorance And The Lack Of Opportunities To The Rural People. Another Factor Is That The Rural People Are Superstitious And Religious Dogmatic Which Is Not The Case In Urban Areas.

In The Past, Patterns Of Living In This Area Were Determined By Land Holdings, Religious Knowledge And Traditional Practices. But The Fact Collected From The Field Suggests That Past Patterns Of Differentiation Has Started Changing Gradually Due To The Changes In The Relational And Institutional Aspects Of Community Life.

As We Have Already Mentioned, That Islam Do Not Support Any Form Of Stratification Or Social Hierarchy Among Its Believers. Descent Or Hereditary Is Not At All A Consideration For Determining The Status And Position Of The Individual In An Islamic Society. Only Piety And Virtuous Qualities Are The Bases For Differentiating The People, And This Differentiation Is Not Associated With The Distribution Of Social Status. But In The Traditional Society This Ideal Sanction Of Islam Did Not Remain Operative. After Conversion, People Differentiate One Another On The Basis Of Descent And Lineage. Syeds, Pirs, And Ulemas Sat At The Top, Because Of Their Foreign Ancestry And Religious Knowledge, Where As The Watils, Wagay And Dums At The Lowest Wrung Because Of Their Ignorance And Occupation.

But In The Present Age The Situation Is Changing. The Distinction Between The Upper And Lower Castes Is Narrowing And Greater Frequency Of Interaction Is Found Between Them. Although, The Sense Of Superiority Or Domination On The Basis Of Religious Knowledge And Foreign Ancestry Are Still Persisting, But Not With The Same Zeal And Consciousness. Modernization, Secularization, Education And New Found Economic Prosperity Has Changed The Attitude And Actual Practices Regarding The Ascribed And Achieved Status And Prestige And Facilitated Social Mobility. Social Hierarchy Is Still Persisting But The Traditional Form Of Rigid Stratification Is Not In Practice. This Change In The Patterns Of Social Stratification And Hierarchy Is An Index Of Change In The Social Structure Of The Area Under Study.

Again, Islamic Sanctions Do Not Divide The Community Into Different Endogamous Groups. But Under The Impact Of Traditional Culture, The Muslims Also Developed A Caste Like Hierarchy And The Concept Of Superior Or Inferior Prevailed On The Basis Of Birth, Descent And Religious Knowledge. This Was Given Due Importance And Muslims Also Performed Marriages Within The Same Castes. But After Independence, Different Caste People Work Shoulder To Shoulder In Day-To-Day Activities But In Spite Of That People Still Follow The Very Tradition In The Matters Of Mate Selection. At Present Within Caste, Marriages Occur. This Is The Only Institution Where Caste System Still Plays A Vital Role.

After Modernization Things Got Better And Better Every Day In Our State As Well As In The Area Under Study. The Area Of Pulwama Has Always Prone To The Adoption Of Social Changes. It Is Primarily Because Majority Of The People Are Earn Their Livelihood From The Broader Economic Activities Present Here And In Other Parts Of The Jammu And Kashmir In The Past, The Vast Majority Of The Population Was Dependent On Agriculture. So, The Social Stratification Was Primarily Based On How Much Land One Owns. But, This Kind Of Social Stratification Has Gone Through Basic Change. People Have Switched Over To Trade, Business And Government Services. The Whole Exploitative And Dehumanizing System Diminished. Spread Of Education, Land Reform Acts, Reservation For Lower Castes, Democratic Ideas, And New Found Economic Prosperity Changed The Traditional Pattern Of Social Stratification. Due To Change In Peoples Standard Of Living, Had Made Them Conscious About The Exploitation They Faced By The Hands Of Upper Castes. At Present It Is Not One’S Caste, Religious Knowledge, Land Holding, Residence, Occupation Or Physical Strength, But One’S Monthly Income, The Style Of Life Or Achievements And Education Which Determines His Status. All The Past Criteria Shredded In This Society. But Still, Only At The Time Of Marriage The Effect Of Caste System Comes Into Being.

In District Pulwama, Old Bases Of Power Such As The High Rank On Caste Hierarchy And The Landed Property Have Decreased. The Rise And Development Of Political Awareness And Political Consciousness Among The Villagers Are Found These Days. This Rise Of Political Awareness Is An Index Of Changing Political Relations And Thus The Change In The Structure Of This Society. New Sources Of Power Like Political Affiliation And Education Are Emerging Fast. The Lower Castes Are Also Having Equal Say In The Present Political System Which Was Not The Case In Maharaja’S Reign. Most Of The Disputes In District Pulwama Are Referred To The Court Of Law. It Is Also Important To Keep In Mind That The Whole Kashmir As Well As The Area Of Study Is Captured By The Terrorists, But In Spite Of That People Are Participating Freely In The Elections.

Finally, Family, Caste And Religious Knowledge Do Play Important Role In The Forms Of Social Stratification. But The Dominating Factors Which Stratify The Pulwama Society Are Monthly Income, Education, And Political Connections. Because Of This, Pulwama Society Is Becoming Class-Based Rather Caste-Based, And Importance Of Land Holding In Determining The Power Of The Family Has Been Replaced By Wealth. At The Same Time, It Is Incorrect To Say That The Institution Of Caste Has Eroded. Higher Caste Status Definitely Increases The Social Standing Of A Person With Higher Income, Education And Political Affiliation.

1.9 Conclusion

This Study Is An Attempt To Study The Broad Patterns Of Social Stratification Prevailing In District Pulwama. As A Complex Social Phenomenon, Social Stratification Which Refers To The Division Of The Society Into Various Hierarchical Strata Is As Old As Human Civilization. While Many Have Talked About A Classless Societies Of Either The Past Or The Future But These Ideas Have Found Very Little Support In Historical Experience. Though The Phenomenon Is Common To All Societies But Its Nature And Forms Vary From Society To Society, And From Culture To Culture.

The Study Of Social Stratification By And Large Deals With Social Inequalities And Has Been One Of The Most Important Topics In Sociology. A Vast Literature Is Available On This Phenomenon And This Important Aspect Of Society Is Focused By The Theologians, Philosophers, Social Anthropologists, Sociologists, And Other Social Scientists From Various Standpoints, It Has Thus Emerged A Very Significant Area Of Contemporary Sociological Research.

The Present Study On Social Stratification Of District Pulwama Was Carried Out With The Objective Of Understanding The Patterns Of Social Stratification In Kashmir In General And District Pulwama In Particular. Most Of The Sociologists And Social Anthropologists Who Have Studied Indian Society Have Concentrated On Caste, While Analyzing Social Stratification They Have Mainly Talked About The Fourfold Varna System. The Present Study Also Tries To Highlight The Different Factors, Forms And Types Of Social Stratification/Inequality, Present In Different Societies And Tries To Show That Every Society Is Stratified Irrespective Of The Nature Of Its Social, Economic And Political Systems. It Also Brings Out The Historical Background Of Social Stratification.

The Focus Of The Present Study Is To Understand The Various Patterns Of Social Stratification. This Study Provided A Comprehensive Picture Of The Patterns Of Social Stratification In District Pulwama, And The Factors Which Brought Changes In Traditional Patterns Of Social Stratification.

The Specific Objectives Around Which The Study Was Built Are ;

- To Understand The Theoretical Perspective Of Social Stratification.
- To Analyze The Past And Present Pattern Of Social Stratification In Kashmir.
- To Arrive At An In-Depth Sociological Understanding Of The Stratification System In Kashmir.
- To Know The Impact And Factors Responsible For The Change In Social Stratification.

The Above Mentioned Objectives Have Been Carried Out In A Set Theoretical-Methodological Framework. It Comprises Of Five Chapters, The First Chapter Deals With The Introduction; Chapter 2nd Deals With The Social Stratification In India; And Chapter 3rd Deals With The Study, Chapter 4th Social Stratification In District Pulwama (Findings Of The Study), And Chapter 5th Deals With Conclusion.

Two Broad Sociological Approaches To Explain And Interpret Social Stratification Have Been Discussed. They Were Functional And Conflict. According To Functional Theorists, Social Stratification Brings About Harmony And Integration In Society By Filling The Basic Needs. The Conflict Approach Emphasis The Role Of Class, Class Conflict And Class Consciousness In Social Stratification. Talcott Parson’S Stratification Is Due To The Unequal Difference Of Different Individuals With Regard To Different Values Of Society. Thus, Those Who Perform Well In Terms Of Societies Value System Are Ranked Higher With Corresponding Rewards And Honor, Others Who Do Not Come Up To Their Level Are Ranked With Less Rewards And Honor.

Marx Argued Social Stratification As Divisible Rather Than An Integrated Structure. He Explains The Course Of Historical Development In Terms Of Conflict Between The Two Contending Classes.

Max Webber’S View Has Similarity With That Of Marx And He Considers Class As A Crucial And Important Aspect Of Social Stratification. Webber Say’S, Prestige And Power Of The Economic Aspect Are Two Dimensions Of Social Stratification. Webber’S Model Of Social Stratification Was Based On The Concepts Of Class, Status, And Party. But Despite The Difficulty Of Separating The Context Of Moral And Ideological Controversy On The One Hand, Forms That Social Science Analysis On The Other, Considerable Progress, Both The Theoretical And Empirical Has Been Made In The Study Of Social Stratification During The Last One Hundred Years.

The Present Study Also Throws Light On The Contributions Made By Sociologists Towards Understanding Social Stratification And Forms Of Inequality In India. The Literature Generated By Indian Sociologists Is Divided Into Decades Starting From 1950 Onwards. In These Years Many Sociologists Have Put Forward Their Views On Social Stratification. In 1950 - 1960 , M.N. Srinivas, G.S. Ghurye, S.C. Dube, R.K. Mukherjee, K.S. Mathur, H. Oresentein And Many More, Is Taken Up For Analysis. They Agreed Caste System Is The Sole Institution Of Social Ranking. Their Theories Are Known As Caste Model Of Indian Society. The Decade Of 1960 - 1970 Saw Few Studies On Social Differentiation, Evolution And Change In Caste And Class. These Sociologists Have Taken Up Studies From Structural Historical Perspective Particularly Of Agrarian And Industrial Stratification. These Studies Have Been Taken By E.R. Leach, Victor D’Souza, Andre Beteille, L. Dumont, M. Marriot, A.R. Desai, And N.K. Bose Etc In This Regard. The Decade 1970 - 1980 Has Contributed Richly To The Emergence Of New Substantive And Theoretical Concern In The Study Of Social Stratification. Many Sociologists Have Contributed For The Further Understanding Of Social Stratification, These Were Yogendra Singh, K.L Sharma, T.N. Madan, Kathleen Gough, Nirmal Singh, Dhanagare, Zarina Bhatty, A. Jha Etc. During The Period Of 1980’S - 1990’S An Important Development Has Been The Rich Impute Of The Study Of Social Stratification, The New Emerging Consciousness Of The Mobile Classes Among The Weaker Sections Of The Indian Society. Both The Conceptual And Methodological Studies Were Carried Out By Many Sociologists These Are, P.K. Bose, Klass, H.A. Lye, Dipankar Gupta, Ehsan Ul Haq, A.M. Shah, A.F.I Ali, Nandu Ram Etc. Besides These Sociologists There Were Other Sociologists, Who In 1990’S - 2002 Have Talked About The Transformation Of Class Structure In Contemporary India, In Which Class Formation, Class Disintegration, And Class Conflict Has Become Important In The Process Of Change In Class Structure. These Are P.K. Bose, R.K. Shudra, V.K. Vashista, S. Jaiswal, And Andre Beteille .

The Finding Of The Present Study Undertakes An Analysis Of The Social Stratification Among The Muslims Of District Pulwama. The Study Of Stratification In The Pulwama Throws Light On Social Hierarchy And The Attitude Of People In Respect Of Discriminatory Behavior And Inequalities Found Among Muslims, Though Islamic Sanctions Do Not Support Any Form Of Stratification Or Social Hierarchy Among The Believers In Islam. Descent And Hereditary Is Not At All A Consideration For Determining The Place And Position Of The Individual In An Islamic Society. Only Piety And Virtuous Qualities Are The Bases For Differentiating The People. This Differentiation Is Not Associated With The Distribution Of Social Status. In The Traditional Society This Ideal Sanction Of Islam Did Not Remain Operative. The Islamic Norms Became Ideal And The Operative Norms Recognized Distinction Between Man And Man On The Bases Of Religions Knowledge. The Muslim Society Like The Traditional Hindu Society Got Divided Into Different Status Groups On The Lineage And Descent.

The Facts Collected From The Field Indicated That Within The Traditional Structure Of The Pulwama, Syed’S, Pirs, And Ulemas , Used To Dominate The Life Of The People As A Whole. As It Is Believed That They Are The Descendants’ Of Prophet Muhammadpbuh That They Are The People Who Have Brought Islam In This Society, And That They Were The Only People Who Were Having Good Religious Knowledge. So, The Masses In General Were Giving Them Good Respect And Treated Them As Superior Human Beings. But At Present The Monopoly Of This Group Has Been Challenged Because Of The Modern Education, Modernization, Secularization, And New Found Economic Prosperity. In The Past, People Completely Follow Their Teachings And Considered Them The Sole Preaching Class. This Particular Class Occupied The Top Most Position In The Hierarchical Arrangements. They Used To Settle Down The Village Disputes Including Domestic Ones As Well. The Social Status Of Syed’S Was Ascribed One. They Maintained Their Social Identity And Status By The Religious Preaching And Foreign Ancestry. But At Present People Follow Them Partly, Because They Have Now Better Religious Knowledge Than Syed’S. People Also Think That Syed’S Don’T Remain Confined To Their Religious Work And They Also Take Participation In Other Social And Political Activities.

Another Reason For It That In Present Age The Distance Between Upper And Lower Castes Is Narrowing And Greater Frequency Of Interaction Is Found. Although, The Sense Of Superiority On The Basis Of Lineage Is Still Persisting But Not With The Same Zeal And Consciousness. People Of Lower Caste Enjoying Better Economic Portion And Having Better Educational Background Are Being Treated At Par With The Members Of Upper Caste People. The Only Institution Where Lineages Still Persists Is At The Time Of Steeling Marriages Of Their Wards. The Syed’S Do Not Like Marital Relations With Low Caste People. No Marriage In The Area Of Study Was Reported Between The High Caste Boy And Girl With Counterpart In The Lower Caste. Hence, The Caste Restriction And Lineage Distinctions Are Taken Into Consideration Only On The Occasion Of Fixing Marriages.

The Pulwama Society Is Presently Class-Based Rather Than Caste-Based. People At Present Are Stratified On The Basis Of Class. Some Are Placed At The Top Of The Hierarchy, Some At The Bottom And Rest In Between. This System Is Explained In Terms Of Class, Particularly An Economic Class. People In The Past Were Differentiating On The Basis Or Large Land Holding And Religious Knowledge. But, At Present It Is Not The Land Holding, But The Monthly Income Of The Person Which Differentiates Families From One Another. Now It Is One’S Income Which Determines His/Her Social Position Or Status In The Society. Economic Class Is Purely Seen In Relation To The Property, Nature Of Service, Trade, Business And The Standard Of Living, But Belonging To A Higher Caste Gives Addition Status To The Person.

The Study Further Indicates The Emergence Of New Bases Of Power. The Findings In This Connection Show That In The Past There Was Correlation Between The Land Ownership And The Power. People Who Were Possessing Large Size Of Land Were At The Same Time Monopolizing Power In The Society. The People Holding Large Size Of Land Were Called Zaildars . The Zaildar Was The Absolute Authority In The Village And The Masses (Tenants ) Always Obeying His Orders To Avoid The Harm Which He Was Capable Of Inflicting. This Pattern Of Power Structure In The Pulwama Continued Up To 1947. The Political Climate Of India As Well As Of Kashmir Has Been Changing Fast Since The Very Beginning Of The 20th Century.

After Independence, New Bases Of Power Emerged. The Findings In This Connection Show That Out Of Many Bases That Are Perceived To Determine Power, Land And Wealth Gets The First Rank Followed By Education, Having A Large Following Political Connection , Belonging To A Higher Caste And Capacity To Use Physical Force In Order Of Preference. In The Past, Large Size Of Land Holding And Physical Strength Of An Individual Was Determinant Of Power In The Society. They Were Called Zaildars . This Power Structure Was Called As Shaksi Raj (I.E., Feudalism). Power Is The Dominating Feature Of Social Stratification In Rural Kashmir. It Has To Do Less With Land Holding As Was The Case In The Past. In Fact, Power Is Followed By Class And The Basis Of Which Are Property, Trade And Business. In The Present Era, The Old Basis Of Power Has Been Replaced By Ones Relation With Political Parties Which Coincide With Economic Position.

After The Achievement Of Independence The Parliamentary Form Of The Democracy Facilitated The Common People To Participate In Politics Not Only As Voter But Also As A Candidate As Well As Campaigner Or Organizer Of Election Campaign. Because Of That, Drastic Changes Were Experienced In The Power Structure Soon. The Major Reason For This Change Was The Abolition Of Zamindari System And The Introduction Of Land Reforms Acts In 1952.

The Finding Of The Study Reveals That Modernization, Education, Economic Prosperity And Mass Media Had A Decisive Impact On Our Society In General And Social Stratification In Particular:

- Education Has Been One Of The Major Factors Responsible For The Change Emerging In Social Stratification. In The Past Education Was Discouraged By Religious Heads (I.E., Syeds, Pirs, Ulemas), Because They Believed That It Goes Against The Teaching Of Islam. But At Present Modern Education Is Encourage By The Masses. This Is Evident By The Fact That For Higher Education People Moves To The Other Parts Of The Country. So, Education Has Certainly Helped In The Mobility Of The People.
- In The Past, Social Stratification Was Primarily Based On How Much Land One Was Holding. But This Kind Of Social Stratification Has Gone Through Basic Changes. Now It Is Monthly Income, Nature Of Services, Business And Trade Which Determines Ones Position In The Society.
- Modernization, Secularization And Economic Independence Of Women Have Bought Lots Of Changes In The Society. Previously The Women Of Pulwama Were Mostly Confined To The Domestic Activities, But Due To The Above Mentioned Factors, Women Are Visible In Every Field, Whether It Is Government Service, Business Or Any Other Economic Activity. These Changes Are Reflected In The Changes Taking Place In Their Traditional Family System And In Marriage As Well.
- Modern Avenues Of Employment Have Changed The Traditional Economic Structure. The Economic Competition Among The Members Of The Same Caste Or Of Other Castes Enables People To Choose Caste-Free Occupations And Various Means And Diversified Ways To Earn More And More Money And Acquire Property. They Have Crossed The Boundaries Of Traditional Division Of Labour. Truly Speaking, The Emergence Of Caste-Free Occupation Has Contributed Towards Dissociating Class Relations From Caste Structure.
- Mass Media Has Also Helped In Bringing Change In The Pattern Of Social Stratification. Media Has Greatly Influenced The Different Spheres Of Social Life In The Pulwama Society. Particularly After 2000, Media Played Vital Role In Exploring Different Aspects Of This Society.
- The Rural Power Is Becoming More Differentiated And Dispersed Because Of The Impact Of Modern Political Forces In Contrast To The Power Structure Which Was Existing In The Past. New Sources Of Power Like Political Connections And Education Have Emerged Because Of The Political Modernization And Industrialization.

1.10 Bibliography

1. Ahmad, Imtiyaz. Ed. Family, Kinship And Marriage Among Muslims In India , New Delhi, Manohar Publications, 1976
2. Ahmad, Imtiyaz. Ed . Caste And Social Stratification Among Muslims In India, New Delhi, Manohar Publications, 1978
3. Ansari, Ghaus. Muslim Caste In Uttar Pradesh; A Study Of Culture Contact , Lucknow, National Publishing House, 1960
4. Baden Powel, B.H. Indian Village Community, London, Longmans, 1896.
5. Bailey, F.G. Tribe And Nation, Bombay, Oxford, 1960.
6. Beindix Reinhard And Lipset Seymour Martin Ed., Class, Status And Power, Glencoe, The Free Press, 1953
7. Beindix Reinhard And Max Webber, An Intellectual Portrait, New York, Doubleday, 1960
8. Barreman, G.D. Hindus Of The Himalayas, California, University Of California, 1963
9. Barreman, Gerald, D. Caste And Other Inequalities; Essays On Inequality Meerut, Folklore Institute, 1970
10. Beteille, Andre. Caste, Class And Power, Bombay, Oxford University Press, 1965
11. Beteille, Andre. Caste; Old And New, Bombay, Asia Publishing House, 1969
12. Beteille, Andre. Ed. Social Inequality, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1969
13. Briggs, G.W. The Chamars, London, Oxford University Press, 1920
14. Carstairs, G.M. The Twice-Born; A Study Of A Community By Of High Caste Hindus. London, The Hogarth Press 1957.
15. Ahmad, Imtiyaz. Ed. Family, Kinship And Marriage Muslims In India. New Delhi. Manohar Publications, 1976
16. Ahmad, Imtiyaz Ed., Caste And Social Stratification Among Muslims In India, New Delhi, Manohar Publications, 1978
17. Ansari Ghaus, Muslim Caste In Uttar Pradesh; A Study Of Culture Contact, Lucknow, National Publishing House, 1960
18. Baden Powel, B.H. Indian Village Community, London, Longmans, 1896.
19. Bailey, F.G. Tribe And Nation, Bombay, Oxford, 1960
20. Bendix Reinhard And Lipset, Seymour Martin (Ed.), Class, Status And Power, Glencoe, The Free Press, 1953.
21. Bendix Reinhard And Max Webber, An Intellectual Portrati. New York, Doubleday, 1960.
22. Barreman, G.D. Hindus Of The Himalayas, California, University Of California, 1963.
23. Barreman, Gerald, D., Caste And Other Inequalities; Essays On Inequality. Meerut, Folklore Institute, 1970.
24. Beteille, Andre. Caste, Class And Power, Bombay, Oxford University Press, 1965
25. Beteille, Andre. Caste; Old And New. Bombay, Asia Publishing House, 1969.
26. Beteille, Andre. Ed. Social Inequality, Penguin Books, Harmondsworth, 1969
27. Briggs, G.W. The Chammars, London, Oxford University Press, 1920.
28. Carstairs, G.M., The Twice-Born; A Study Of A Community Of High Caste Hindus, London, The Hogarth Press 1957.
29. Chauhan, B.R., A Rajasthan Village, New Delhi, Vir Publishers, 1967
30. Chauhan, S.K. Social Stratification In Assam. New Delhi, Classical Publishing Company, 1980.
31. Dahrendorf, Ralph, Class And Class Conflict In Industrial Society, Stanford, University Press, 1966
32. Davis, Kingsley. Human Society, Delhi, Surjeet Publications, 1981.
33. Davis, Kingsley. They Population Of India And Pakistan, Princeton University Press, 1951.
34. Derret, J.D.M. Introduction To Modern Hindu Law. Bombay, Oxford University Press, 1963.
35. Desai, A.R. Ed. Rural Sociology In India. Bombay, Popular Prakashan, 1969.
36. Desai, A.R. State And Society In India; Essay In Dissent. Bombay, Popular Prakashan, 1978.
37. D. Souza, Victor. Inequality And Its Perpetuation. New Delhi, Manohar Publications, 1981.
38. Dube, S.C. Indian Village. London, Routledge And Kegan Paul, 1955.
39. Dube, S.C. India’S Changing Villages. Ithaca, Cornell University Press, 1958.
40. Dumont, L. Homo Hierarchicus. London, Paladin Granada Publishing Ltd., 1970.
41. Ghosh, K. Agricultural Labourers In India. Indian Publications, Calcutta, 1969
42. Ghurye, G.S. Caste And Class In India Bombay, Popular Book Depot, 1957.
43. Ghurye, G.S. Caste, Class And Occupation. Bombay, Popular Book Depot. 1957.
44. Ghurye, G.S. Caste And Race In India, Popular Prakashan, 1969.
45. Giddens, Franklin Hendry. The Principles Of Sociology . Jaipur, Print Well Publishers, 1989
46. Giddens, Anthony. Capitalism And Modern Social Theory: An Analysis Of The Writings Of Marx, Durkheim And Max Weber. Cambridge University Press, 1971.
47. Lindberg, J. Behind Poverty: The Social Formation Of A Tamil Village, London, Curzon Press, 1975.
48. Habib, Irfan. The Agrarian System In Mughal India, Bombay, Asia Publishing House, 1963.
49. Haralambos, M. And Herald, R.M. Sociology: Themes And Perspectives. Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1989.
50. Harrison, S. India: The Most Dangerous Decades. Princeton, University Press. 1960.
51. Horton, Paul B. And Horton, Robert L. Introductory Sociology. Homewood, Dow Johas-Irwin, 1982.
52. Horton, Paul B. And Hunt, Chester L. Sociology. Auckland, Mc Grawhill International Book Company, 1984.
53. Husain, Majid And Hashia, M. Haseena. Seasonal Migration Of Kashmiri Labour, New Delhi, Pima Publishing House, 1989.
54. Hutton, J.H. Caste In India. Bombay, Oxford University Press, 1946.
55. Ibbeston, D.C.J. Punjab Castes. Lahore, Government Printing Press, 1916.
56. Isaacs, H.R. India’S Ex-Untouchables, New York, The John Day Company, 1965.
57. Iswaran, K. Tradition And Economy In Village India. Bombay, Cochin Allied Publishers, 1966.
58. Jackson, J.A. Social Stratification. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1968
59. Jayaraman, Raja. Caste And Class, Dynamics Of Inequality In Indian Society, New Delhi, Hindustan Publishing Corporation, 1981.
60. Karve, Iravati. Kinship Organization In India, Bombay Asia Publishing House, 1953.
61. Kolenda, Pauline. Caste In Contemporary India; Beyond Organic Solidarity, California, Benjamin Cummings Publishing Company, 1978.
62. Kothari, Rajni. Ed. Caste In Indian Politics, New Delhi, Orient Longman Ltd, 1970.
63. Lenski, G.E. Power And Privilege: A New Theory Of Stratification, Mcgraw Hill, 1966.
64. Macionis, J. John. Sociology, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1987.
65. Madan, T.N. Family And Kinship: A Study Of The Pandits Of Rural Kashmir. Bombay, Asia Publishing House 1965.
66. Majumdar, D. N. Caste And Communication In An Indian Village. Bombay, Asia Publishing House 1958.
67. Mandelbaum, David G. Society In India; Continuity And Change. Vol. I And Ii Berkeley, University Of California Press, 1970.
68. Marriot, Makim. Caste Ranking And Community, Structure In Five Regions Of India And Pakistan. Poona, Deccan College, 1965.
69. Marx, Karl. Articles On India, Bombay, Peoples Publishing House, 1945.
70. Mathur, K.S. Caste And Ritual In Malava Village. Bombay, Asia Publishing House, 1964.
71. Mayer, A. Caste And Kinship In Central India. Berkeley, University Of California Press, 1960.
72. Miller, D.B. From Hierarchy To Stratification; Changing Patterns Of Social Inequality In A North Indian Village. Delhi, Oxford University Press, 1976,
73. Misra, B.B. The Indian Middle Classes. London, Oxford University Press, 1964
74. Mukherjee, R.K. The Dynamics Of A Rural Society; A Study Of The Economic Structure In General Village. Berlin, Academic-Verlag, 1957.
75. Mukherjee, D.P. Diversities, Delhi, People’S Bookise, 1958.
76. Ogburn, Sociology. Boston, The Riverside Press, 1958.
77. Oran’S, M. Santal. A Tribe In Search Of A Great Tradition, Detroit, Wayne University Press, 1965.
78. Owen, C. Social Stratification, New York, Humanities Press, 1968.
79. Pandey, Rajendra. Social Inequality; Features, Forms And Functions, Lucknow, Anuj Publications, 1982.
80. Park. R. And Tinker. Eds. Leadership And Political Institutions In India, Princeton, University Press, 1960.
81. Popenoe, David. Sociology, New Jersey, Prentice Hall, 1977.
82. Pradhan, M.C. The Political System Of The Jats Of North India, Bombay. Oxford University Press, 1966.
83. Risley, H.H. 2nd Ed. The Peoples Of India, Delhi, Orient Books, 1969.
84. Rose, Peter I. Glazar, Myron And Glazer. Penina Migdal. Sociology Inquiring Into Society, New York, St. Martin’S Press, 1987.
85. Sharma, K.L. Essays On Social Stratification. Jaipur, Rawat Publications, 1980.
86. Singer, Milton And Colin, Bernard S. Structure And Change In India Society. Chicago, Aldine Publishing Co.1973.
87. Singh, Yogendra. Modernization Of Indian Tradition, Delhi, Thomson Press Limited, 1973.
88. Singh, Yogendra. Social Stratification And Change In India. New Delhi, Manohar Publications, 1977.
89. Smith, Ronald W. And Preston, Fredrick. Sociology: An Introduction. New York, St. Martin’ Press 1977.
90. Srinivas, M.N. Caste In Modern India And Other Essays. Bombay, Asia Publishing House, 1962.
91. Srinivas, M.N Indian Social Structure. Delhi, Hindustan Publishing Corporation-India, 1986.
92. Stewart, Elbert W. And Glynn, James A. Introduction To Sociology. New York, Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, 1985.
93. Thio, Alex. Sociology; An Introduction. New York, Harper And Row Publishers, 1986
94. Weber, Max. From Max Weber; Essays In Sociology. London, Routledge And Kegan Paul, 1948.

Articles

1. Bailey, F.G. Closed Social Stratification In India. European Journal Of Sociology, (Cambridge) Vol.4.No.1, 1963, Pp.107-124
2. Bailey, F.G. Closed Social Stratification In India. European Journal Of Sociology, (Cambridge) Vol.I. No.1, 1963,
3. Barber, Bernard. Social Stratification, International Encyclopedia Of The Social Sciences; New York, Macmillan And Free Press, Soc 1 To Thin, Vol. 15, Pp.288-290.
4. Berreman, Gerald D. Caste In India And The United States, American Journal Of Sociology, Chicago, Vol.66, Pp.120-127.
5. Berreman, Gerald D. Caste In India And The United States, American Journal Of Sociology, Chicago, Vol.66, 1966.Pp.120-127.
6. Berreman, Gerald D. The Study Of Caste Ranking In India, South Western Journal Of Anthropology. Chicago, Vol.50, 1965, Pp.260-268.
7. Berreman, Gerald D. The Concept Of Caste, International Encyclopedia Of Social Sciences. New York, Macmillan And Free Press), Vol.2, 1968, Pp.333-339.
8. Beteille .A. A Note On The Referents Of Caste, European Journal Of Sociology, Cambridge ,Vol.5, 1964,Pp.130-134.
9. Beteille, A. And Srinivas, M.N. He Harijans Of India, Scientific American. Cambridge, Vol.213, 1965, Pp.13-17.
10. Beteille, Andre. Closed And Open Social Stratification In India, European Journal Of Sociology. Cambridge, Vol. 7, 1966.
11. Beteille, Andre. Ideas And Interests, Some Conceptual Problems In The Study Of Social Stratification In India. International Social Science Journal. Cambridge, Vol.21, No.7, 1969.
12. Bhattacharya, Ranjit. Social And Cultural Constraints In Agriculture In Three Villages.(Hindu, Muslim And Tribal) Of West Bengal, Journal Of The Indian Anthropological Society. Vol.3, 1968, Pp.79-108.
13. Bose, Nirmal. K. Caste In India. Man And India. Vol.31, 1951, Pp.107-123.
14. Bottomore, T.B. Cohesion And Division In Indian Elites In Philip Mason Ed. India And Ceylon, Unity And Diversity. Oxford University Press, 1967.
15. Bougie, C. The Essence And Reality Of Caste System, Contributions To Indian Sociology. New Delhi, No.2, April, 1958.
16. Buckley, William. Social Stratification And The Functional Theory Of Social Differentiation, American Sociological Review. Washington, Vol.23, No.3.
17. Cox, O.C. Caste And Race: A Distinction, American Journal Of Sociology. Chicago, Vol.50, 1945.Pp.360-365.
18. Davis, Kinsley And Moore, Wilbert E., Some Principles Of Stratification, American Sociological Review. Washington, Vol.10, No.2, 1945.
19. Desai, I.P. An Analysis. In Symposium: Caste And Joint Family, Sociological Bulletin, (New Delhi), Vol.4, 1955, Pp.97-117.
20. Desai, I.P. Ed. Symposium: Caste And Joint Family, Sociological Bulletin, New Delhi, Vol.4, 1955 Pp.85-146.
21. D’Souza, Victor. Measurement Of Rigidity-Fluidity Dimension Of Social Stratification In Six Indian Villages, Sociological Bulletin. New Delhi, Journal Of The Indian Sociological Society, Vol. Xvii, No.1, March, 1969, Pp.35-49.
22. D’Souza, V.S. Social Inequalities And Development In India, Economic And Political Weekly. Bombay, Vol.X, No.19, 1975, Pp.770-773.
23. Dumont, Louis. Pure And Impure, Contributions To India Sociology. Delhi, Vol.3, 1959, Pp.9-39.
24. Dumont, Louis. Caste, Race And Stratifications: Reflection Of A Social Anthropologist, Contributions To Indian Sociology. Delhi, Vol.5, 1961. Pp.20-43.
25. Dumont, Louis .Tribe And Caste In India, Contributions To Indian Sociology. Delhi, Vol.5, Vol.6, 1962, Pp.120-122.
26. Galanter, Mare. Equality And Protective Discrimination In India, Rutgers Law Review, California, Vol.16, No.1, 1961.
27. Galanter, Mare. Law And Caste In Modern India, Asian Society, California, Vol.3, No.2, 1963.
28. Galanter, M. Law And Caste In Modern India, Asian Survey, California, Vol. 3. 1963, Pp.544-599.
29. Gould, Harold. Sanskritization And Westernization: A Dynamic View, Economic Weekly, Bombay, Vol, 13, 1961.
30. Gould, H. Lucknow Rickshawallas: The Social Organization Of An Occupational Category, International Journal Of Comparative Sociology. Bombay, Vol.6, 1965, Pp. 24-27.
31. Griffin, Larry J. And Kallebetg, Arne L. Stratification And Meritocracy In The United States: Class And Occupational Recruitment Patterns, British Journal Of Sociology. Vol.32, No. 1-4, 1981, Pp.1-23.
32. Guhu, U. Caste Among Rural Bengali Muslims, Man In India. Bihar, Vol.45, 1965, Pp.167-169.
33. Gumperza, J. Dialect Differences And Social Stratification In A North Indian Village, American Anthropologist. Washington, Vol.60, 1958, Pp.976-88.
34. Hitchcock, J.H. The Ideas Of The Martial Rajput, Journal Of American Folklore. Washington, Vol. 71, 1958, Pp, 216-22.3.
35. Hoerning, Karl H. Power And Social Stratification, Sociological Quarterly. New Delhi, Vol.12, No.1-4, 1971, Pp.3-13.
36. Kroeber, A.L. Caste, Encyclopedia Of Social Sciences. New York, Vol. 3, 1939, Pp.254-257.
37. Mayer, A. The Indian Caste System, International Encyclopedia Of Social Sciences. New York, 1968, Pp.339-344.
38. Oran’S, M. Maximizing In Jajmani Land: A Model Of Caste Relations, American Anthropologist.Vol.70, 1968.
39. Parsons, Talcott. A Revised Analytical Approach To The Theory Of Social Stratification In T. Parsons Essays In Sociological Theory, Glencoe, The Free Press, 1954.
40. Siddiqui, M.K. Caste Among The Muslims Of Calcutta, In Surjit Sinha (Ed.). Social And Cultural Profile Of Calcutta. Cyclostyled Report, 1970.
41. Singh Yogendra. Sociology Of Social Stratification In A Survey Of Research In Sociology And Social Anthropology. Vol. I, (Icssr), Bombay, Popular Prakashan, 1974.
42. Singh, Yogendra. Caste And Class: Some Aspects Of Continuity And Change, Sociological Bulletin. New Delhi, Vol.17, No.2, 1968.

[...]

---

¹ Frank. N. Magill, (Ed.1995), International Encyclopedia Of Sociology, London, Vol. 2, P. 1262

² C. Owen, (1968), Social Stratification, New York, P.2.

³ Victor, D’ Souza, (1981) Inequality And Its Perpetuation , (Manohar Pub.), P .2

⁴ A.F.I, Ali, (1992) Social Stratification Among Hindu And Muslim Community, Commonwealth Pub,. P. 3

⁵ Anther, J. (2007 1st Ed), Encyclopedia Of Social Sciences (Sociology), Ivy. Pub. Delhi, P. 463

⁶ Raymond, Aron (1987), Main Currents In Sociological Thought, Vol. 1, London. P. 118

⁷ S.K. Chauhan (1980), Social Stratification In Assam, (New Delhi,) P.4.

⁸ G.S Ramon And M.L, Robert (Ed 2000), A Social World, Pearson Pub, P. 137

⁹ Ken, Browne (3rd Ed. 2005), An Introduction To Sociology, Polity Press, P.11

¹⁰ P.B. Horton And R.N. Horton (1982) Introductory Sociology, Homewood, P. 65

¹¹ David Sills, (Ed. 1998) Encyclopedia Of Social Sciences, (Macmillan) Vol. 15, P.289.

¹² A.K Sahoo, Et.Al, (Ed. 2006), Trends In Sociology, (Abhijeet Pub Delhi,). P.40

¹³ Ogburn And Nimkoff (1940), Sociology, (Cambridge), P- 157

¹⁴ S.K Sahoo, Et-Al, Op-Cit, P. 39

¹⁵ Antony Giddens, (3rd Ed. 1998), Sociology, Polity Press, (Cambridge,), P. 240

¹⁶ W.F. Thompson And J.V. Hicky (2nd Ed. 1996), Society In Focus,, Harper, P. 187

¹⁷ Nicholas Abercrombie (2005), Sociology, Polity Press, P. 79

¹⁸ A. Giddens, (1997), Op.Cit, P. 241

¹⁹ Ginsberg, Sociology, Subject Pub, 1979, P. 165

²⁰ W.F. Thompson And J.V. Hicky, Op- Cit- P. 187

²¹ Ken. Browne, Op-Cit, P. 14

²² Nicholas, Abercrombie, Op. Cit. P. 80

²³ Ibid. 79

²⁴ Ken Browne, Op. Cit P-13

²⁵ Nicholas Abercrombie, Op. Cit. P.80

²⁶ Ibid.

²⁷ David Sills, Op. Cit. P. 289

²⁸ Frank M. Magill, Op. Cit. P. 1262

²⁹ M.M. Tumin, (2n Ed) (1991), Social Stratification, Prentice Hall (New Delhi), P. 8-9

³⁰ A.F.I Ali , Op.Cit, P-4

³¹ David Sills, Op-Cit. P. 289

³² Richard, T. Shaffer (6th Ed 2006), Sociology, Tata Mcgraw, Hill Pub (New Delhi, P. 207

³³ Ibid 207

³⁴ L.L Lindsey And S. Beach, – (2008) Sociology, Prentice Hall New Jersey, P- 237

³⁵ Guerra And Marill (Ed), Op. Cit. P.142

³⁶ C.H. Hurst (4th Ed. 2001)Social Inequality – (Pearson’S Pub U.S.A), P.172

³⁷ Ralf Dahrendorf (1970), On The Origin Of Inequality Among Men, Stanford , P. 16

³⁸ Harold A. Kerbo ( 2000), Social Stratification And In Equality, New York, P.137

³⁹ Frank. N. Magill (1995), Op. Cit. Vol. 2 P. 1282

⁴⁰ David- Sills, Op. Cit. P. 290

⁴¹ Harold. Kerbo, Op-Cit. P. 95

⁴² M.M. Tumin, Op.Cit. P.13

⁴³ Charles, Op. Cit. P- 179

⁴⁴ Scott Appelrouth And L.D. Edles (2008), Classical And Contemporary Sociological Theory, Sage Publication Los Angles, London And Delhi, P. 166

⁴⁵ David Sills, Op. Cit. P. 301

⁴⁶ Scott Appelrouth And L.D. Edles, Op.Cit P.166

⁴⁷ George, Ritzer. Op-Cit P.231

⁴⁸ Antony, Giddens. Op.Cit. P.247

⁴⁹ George, Ritzer. Ibid.

⁵⁰ Ibid.

⁵¹ A.F.I. Imam, Op. Cit., P. 10

⁵² Harold. A. Kerbo, Op.Cit. P. 105

⁵³ Ibid

⁵⁴ Charles, E. Hurst, Op. Cit. P. 106

⁵⁵ Harold. A. Kerbo. Op.Cit P. 106

⁵⁶ Frank, N. Magill. Op.Cit. P. 1267

⁵⁷ M. Harolombus, 1997. Sociological Themes And Perspectives, New Delhi P. 31

⁵⁸ S. Appelrouth And L.D. Edles, Op- Cit. P. 360

⁵⁹ Harold, A. Kerbo, Op. Cit P. 120

⁶⁰ Ibid

⁶¹ W.E. Thompson And J.V. Hicky, Op.Cit. P. 236

⁶² R.T Schaefer, Op.Cit., P. 210

⁶³ S. Guerra And R.L. Marill, Op.Cit. P. 158

⁶⁴ L.L. Lindsey And S. Beach, Op.Cit. P. 236

⁶⁵ Singh, Yogendra, 1974. A Survey Of Research In Sociology And Social Anthropology, Vol. 1 (Iccsr) Bombay Popular Prakashan, P. 311-335

⁶⁶ Gough, Kathleen (1979), Dravidian Kinship And Mode Of Production, Contribution To Society, P. 265-291

⁶⁷ Beteille, Andre, (2001), Hierarchical And Competitive Inequality, Sociological Bulletin, P. 3-26

⁶⁸ P.C. Aggarwal 1978, Caste Hierarchy In Meo Village Of Rajasthan. Imtiyaz Ahmad (Ed.), Caste And Social Stratification Among Muslims In India (New Delhi), P. 141

⁶⁹ Ibid. P. 243

⁷⁰ Imtiyaz, Ahmad (Ed.) 1978, Caste And Social Stratification Among Muslims In India, New Delhi, P. 24

⁷¹ Ibid. P. 121

⁷² M.L. Kapur, (1992), Social And Economic History Of J&Amp;K State, Anmol Pub. New Delhi, P. 119

⁷³ Parvez Dewan (2004), Jammu, Kashmir And Ladakh, Manas Pub. New Delhi, P. 385

⁷⁴ Majid Hussain And Hashiq, M. Haseena (1989), Seasonal Migration Of Kashmiri Society, New Delhi, P. 81

⁷⁵ Parvez, Dewan, Op.Cit. P. 385

⁷⁶ Ibid. P.386

⁷⁷ Majid Hussain, Op.Cit. P 81

Frequently asked questions

What is the main topic discussed in this document?

This document provides a comprehensive overview of social stratification, particularly within the context of India and the Kashmir region. It explores various theoretical frameworks, historical perspectives, and the dynamics of caste, class, and power.

What are the key systems of social stratification discussed?

The document discusses four major types of stratification systems: slavery, estate, caste, and class. It examines their characteristics, historical context, and relevance in different societies.

What theoretical frameworks are used to explain social stratification?

Several theoretical frameworks are presented, including:

• The Natural Superiority Theory (Social Darwinism)
• Marxist Conflict Theory
• Weberian Multiple-Hierarchies Theory (Class, Status, and Party)
• Functionalist Theory (Durkheim, Parsons, Davis-Moore)

Each with their strengths and criticisms.

How does Karl Marx's theory explain social stratification?

Karl Marx viewed class as the key to history and social change, defining classes by their relationship to the means of production. He focused on the conflict between the bourgeoisie (owners) and the proletariat (workers) in capitalist societies.

What is Max Weber's contribution to the theory of social stratification?

Max Weber expanded Marx's single-class dimension into a multi-dimensional view, emphasizing class, status, and party as separate but interacting bases for social hierarchies. He also focused on the development of large bureaucratic institutions.

How do Functionalist theories explain social stratification?

Functionalist perspectives, such as those of Durkheim, Parsons, and Davis-Moore, argue that social stratification is inevitable and necessary for societal stability. They believe it ensures that important positions are filled by capable individuals.

What is the Indian perspective on social stratification discussed in this document?

The document explores the evolution of social stratification in India, focusing on the caste system and its transformations. It examines the contributions of various Indian sociologists and the impact of factors like Sanskritization, industrialization, and political changes.

How does the study relate to the social stratification in Kashmir?

The study focuses on District Pulwama in Kashmir and analyzes the historical and contemporary patterns of social stratification. It explores how caste, class, and power interact and how modernization and other factors are influencing changes in social hierarchies.

What are the objectives of the study conducted in Pulwama?

The objectives of the study include:

• Understanding theoretical perspectives on social stratification.
• Analyzing past and present patterns of social stratification in Kashmir.
• Gaining an in-depth sociological understanding of the stratification system.
• Identifying factors responsible for changes in social stratification.
• Providing a sociological critique of the stratification scenario in District Pulwama.

What methods were used to collect data for the Pulwama study?

The study used a combination of methods, including:

• Interview schedules
• Secondary sources (books, journals, census reports, etc.)
• Pilot study
• Stratified random sampling to select households

What are the key findings of the study regarding caste in Pulwama?

The study found that caste is still present in Pulwama, although not as rigid as in other parts of India. While it's losing importance in many aspects of life, it continues to play a significant role in marriage arrangements. The Syeds are traditionally the dominant caste, but this dominance is declining with the spread of education and economic changes.

What are the key findings of the study regarding class in Pulwama?

The study revealed that the traditional agrarian class structure, based on landholding, has been transformed. Monthly income, trade, business, and government service are now more important determinants of social status. While the concept of a dominant class persists, wealth is increasingly replacing land as the primary source of economic power.

What are the key findings of the study regarding power in Pulwama?

The study found that power was historically linked to landownership, with large landowners wielding significant influence. However, after independence and land reforms, new sources of power have emerged, including political affiliation, education, and wealth. The traditional power structure has been altered, and there is greater political awareness and participation among the population.

What are the overall conclusions of the study?

The study concludes that social stratification in Pulwama is a complex and evolving phenomenon. While caste continues to influence certain aspects of life, class-based factors, particularly economic status, are becoming increasingly important. Traditional patterns of power are also being transformed by modernization, education, and political changes. The study highlights a shift from a more rigid, caste-based society to a more fluid, class-based society, although elements of the former still persist.