A Study of the Social Stratification in Bangalore City

ditional Indian Society, social stratification was based on system of caste which determined hereditarily fixed differential occupations for members. Davis1 maintains that Indian caste system in its perfection is an ideal type and because of its inherent contradiction, system has not been absolute. No social system can remain static and this applies equally to caste. Thus it is plausible that some changes have been taking place in caste structure over years. Industrialization with its attendant urbanization has initiated marked changes in Indian social structure in urban centers during last two decades. Mobility from traditionally rooted village residences to towns and cities tends to undermine rigidity and stability of caste system. Urban centers do not have a congenial social setting for observance of caste ritual and perpetuation of caste occupations. Social control is more or less absent and strict adherence to and adoption of hereditary occupations has become less obligatory. Numerous industrial and specialized occupations which demand education and training rather than birth are available in urban areas. This facilitates transitional process and rural-urban migrants tend to abandon their caste occupations and enter into urban industrial vocations. Davis argues that one of three aspects of caste especially susceptible to influence of Western technology is, the association between occupation and caste.2 He adds that old occupations have tended to disappear and new ones to emerge with introduction of technology. No longer can occupation be based exclusively on birth and caste. The new social structure that is emerging as a result of occupational change is not without its social hierarchy. But occupational placement and social stratification according to birth tend to disappear. As in an industrial society, we may expect people to be stratified according to either their income, occupation, or education, or a combination of any or all of these three criteria. Ghurye, who has made intensive studies of caste and class, says, Considering similarity of caste system with estates system, it is but natural that its transformation should install harmonious structure of social classes as was case with Britain's estates system.3 Davis, too, visualizes this trend when he declares of caste, It shows every sign of turning into a system of class.4 These two statements were made as far back as 1950 and since then Indian social organization in general, and caste in particular, have witnessed tremendous upheaval and change. Caste and class structures cannot be expected to be identical because criteria for placement in two hierarchies are entirely different. One is born into a caste and therefore it is an ascribed status. Income, education, and occupation, main criteria for class position, have to be earned and so class is an achieved status. Hence a continuation of caste ranks within emerging class system is not probable and a correlation of caste and class structures cannot be anticipated. Our concern in present paper is to test above theoretical 1 Kingsley Davis, Human Society, New York: The Macmillan Company, 1959, pp. 382-385. 2 Kingsley Davis, The Population of India and Pakistan, Princeton, N. J.: Princeton University Press, 1951, p. 173. 3 G. S. Ghurye, Caste and Class in India, Bombay: The Popular Book Depot, 1950, p. 228. 4 Davis, op. cit., p. 176.