A
New Interpretation......
A
New Interpretation......
Hocart's theory of caste revolves around
four concepts: kinship, domination, ritual and decay.
Hocarts main emphasis, however, is that sacrifice is the essential
basis to the caste system. Because of this assertion, Hocart
claims that the Kshatriyas are in fact the first caste and should be
named rightly so; this is contrary to idealist theory, which states
that Brahmans are the first caste. He supports this assertion
by saying that “Kings are the first caste because their function
is a crucial one- to command the sacrifices which regenerate the
cosmic order, and guarantee the well being of the community.”
(Quigley, 115).
Because Hocart believes that the priest
is the servant of the king, the second caste supplies the priests, or
Brahmans, who perform the rituals for the king. Hocart supports
this twist because he believes that sacrifice is essential to the
caste system; that it is the basis of it, and because the kings do
the sacrificing, they are the first caste. When the priests
perform the rituals, they do so for the king, or the sacrificer, and
therefore are serving the king.
The third caste is the same in ideology
and in Hocarts theory, yet their function is quite different.
The Vaishyas not only produce agricultural wealth and farm, but they
also are the support on which the monarch and priesthood rest.
They are also responsible for the defense of the Kingdom, and are as
military as the nobles.
Hocart does not refer to the Sudras as the fourth caste, but
only as the low caste, or the serfs. They are excluded from the
sacrifice, an indication that they are different from the three
worthy castes. However, he notes that the Sudras are a form of
priests, since they deal with death, something that the high castes
will not touch.
Low as the serfs are, we must not confuse
them with those who stand on the outside society all together- the
outcastes. However, unlike in idealist theory, these oucastes
can be kings, priests or noblemen; what makes them outcastes is that
they stand outside the communion, they are members of nations that
worship other gods and because of this, they represent demons.
This communion Hocart speaks of is the Kingdom, and it is as much of
a political unit as it is a ritual one.(Quigley, 117-120).
Hocarts sacrificial characterization of
the caste system means that birth is not a sufficient condition of
caste membership. “Initiation is indispensable.”
(Quigley, 125). Although this initiation process is not
described, it is almost more important than kinship because it can
override kinship in certain circumstances. In fact, in some
cases birth is not even necessary for the performance of particular
ritual functions which are traditionally reserved for certain castes;
“descent is merely a qualification which may at times be
dispensed with.” (Hocart: 56, Quigley, 128).
|
The conclusion and flourish of Hocarts argument is essentially that castes are about kingship and ritual, and these are inseparable. The caste system is ultimately a replica of society headed by a king who is responsible in every way for his people. In this task, he requires assistance from those in charge of various departments. Basically, it is a system of kings and chiefs. Some of the chiefs are perceived more rewardingly as priests, while others are aspirant kings and the like. |
|
The caste system, any way you
perceive it, is probably one of the most intriguing and
complex societies in the world. The interactions and
relationships the people in the caste system share will
probably never fully be understood, especially to a society
as opposite as ours. |