The Britishers were more focused on understanding caste rather than gender to understand India. The British ideologues propounded different theories to explain caste. Nesfield hold the position that “the question of caste is not one of race at all, but of culture” (Nesfield: 1885).
In his book, Brief View of the Caste System of the North West Provinces and Oudh, published in 1885, Nesfield propounded the theory that caste arose from occupational specialization, and those castes which practiced more “advanced” occupations maintained a higher status than castes which practiced less “advanced” occupations (ibid). In contrast, according to Risley, the caste system arose out of a racial clash. He postulated that a racially distinct “fair long-headed race” of invading Aryans (speaking an Indo–European language) entered the subcontinent from the North West and encountered and subjugated “dark-skinned Dravidians” (Risley: 1915), the “oldest of the Indian races” (ibid). These invading Aryans “subdued the inferior race”, “captured women according to their needs” and “closed their ranks to all further intermixture of blood,” thereby becoming an upper caste (ibid). Risley’s accounts show that caste and women were the main tool for maintaining hierarchy.
Caste always remained the most dominant factor
of north Indian society especially the Hindi speaking belt. In Hindu society, caste
divisions play a part in both actual social interactions and in the ideal scheme
of values. Members of different castes are expected to behave differently and to
have different values and ideals (Béteille :1965). But the gender structure remains
the same in almost all castes.
Another way through which British rulers attempted
to understand the Indian population and caste was conducting census. The justification
given for conducting the census was governmental preparedness to deal with disaster
situations. Nonetheless, the census went far ahead of merely counting persons or
even enquiring into sex ratios or general living conditions. The questionnaire for
taking the census was asked for nationality, race, tribe, religion and caste. Certainly,
none of these were significant to emergency measures needed for the welfare of Indians.
Britishers found that caste was the key to understanding India. Caste was seen as
the essence of Indian society, the system through which it was possible to evaluate
the ability of persons, depute the work to the population of indigenous people according
to their ability.
Risely wrote that: "the caste system itself,
with its singularly perfect communal organization, is a machinery admirably fitted
for the diffusion of new ideas; those castes may in course of time group themselves
into classes representing the different strata of society; and that India may thus
attain, by the agency of these indigenous corporations, the results that have been
arrived at elsewhere through the fusion of individual types." In making this
statement Risley exposes the British agenda of creating a society that would confirm
the British ideals through the use of a British interpretation of caste.
The Census of India was started by the British
in the late 19th century, and in 1935 the British Government came up with a list
of 400 groups considered untouchable and tribal groups, who would get special privileges
in order to overcome deprivation and discrimination. These groups were termed as
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
The advent of the Britishers introduced modernity
and education in India, and some of the British officials resisted caste and gender
domination and cruel practices based on caste and gender. But they were well aware
of the fact that to rule the Indian population, they should not touch its essential
structure of caste and gender. This would ultimately benefit them as half of the
population was oppressed and unable to raise their voices.
