Cast(e) in 1931 and still counting

Enumerators continue to face varna overlaps, political count bias

New Delhi: The Karnataka caste survey, made public recently, demonstrates the challenges in population enumeration on the caste line. Overlapping imprints of the “varna system” among non-Hindus and the tendency to be “counted more for political reasons” are strikingly similar to the ones faced by surveyors a century back, when the last caste count was conducted in India along with the decennial census.

One of the key features of the 1931 data, used extensively by the Mandal commission to extrapolate the backward classes population, was “caste rules observed by Muslims” and Indian Christians, despite no commensality (practice of sharing a meal or eating together) restrictions. The report documents the prevalence of intergroup marriage rules among Muslims. For Indian-Christians, the “caste by no means was ignored after conversion”.

The complex social matrix, as a result, made the return of caste a rather cumbersome exercise. The Superintendent of Census for Madras cites an incident from Coorg where an “extremely dark individual pursuing the occupation of waterman describes his caste has Surryavamsa, or the family of the sun”.

A few provinces were also reporting instances of social groups using “descriptive nouns” implying association with the “higher-verna”. Grazier castes like Ahir, Gwala and Gopis were consolidating under a common denomination, “Yadavs”. Artisan communities, blacksmiths, carpenters, and masons returned their caste as “Vishwakarma”.

The process of data segregation and analysis was further complicated by a growing tendency among the population in the use of a descriptive noun implying association with a “higher verna”, either Brahmin or Rajput. This could be ascribed to the desire to either “rise in social estimation” or was intended to be counted more for “political considerations”.

For the 1931 enumeration, J H Hutton, the Commissioner of Census, modified the data collection forms to distill caste numbers. A separate tabulation for returning “nil-caste” was incorporated.

More than 18 lakh, which constituted less than one percent of the population, opted for nil-caste. Of these, 98% were returned from Bengal, perhaps under the influence of the reformist Brahmo Movement.

There were strict instructions for the tabulation of tribes and “exterior” or “depressed castes”, defined as communities, subjected to social restrictions like use of “public conveniences, such as roads, ferries, wells, and schools”.

In the Mysore State, only two castes, the Holiyas and Madigas, were returned as the “exterior castes” or Adikarnatakas. Their total number was estimated to be just over 10 lakh, which was 15% of the state’s population. The number for the ‘Coorg’ district was close to 25,000.

It is mentioned, the Mysore Government treated four other castes as “depressed”: Banjara, Koracha, Korama, and Vodda. Their cumulative count was close to 2.4 lakh.

It is difficult to make a comparison between the data tabulated in the 1931 census with today’s Karnataka, whose geographical boundaries comprise the Mysore State, Coorg district and parts of Nizam’s Hyderabad and the Bombay and Madras Presidencies as they existed in British India.

In Mysore State, ‘Vakkaligas’ or Vokkaligas with over 13 lakh population, were counted to be the largest community. The total population of the State, including military establishments, was more than 65 lakh, of which 1.72 lakh resided in Bangalore city and over 11 lakh in the district. Lingayat population was pegged at 7.7 lakh and Kuruba at 4.35 lakhs. A section of the Lingayat were also residing in the Bombay Presidency.

The 1931 census, conducted at a total cost of Rs 48,76,000, was also criticised for the enumeration of castes, which some felt was an exercise that would “perpetuate the system”. But this “ostrich” like approach was overruled on the account that it was not possible to get rid of an institution by mere denial of its existence.