June 10, 1961
THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY
Book Review
The Jajmani System
M S A Rao
Thomas O Beidelman : A Comparative Analysis of the Jajmani System.
tion for Asian Studies, V I I I , 1959, pp 86. Price not mentioned.
MR
Beidelman's p r o b l e m is to
determine the locus of power
w i t h i n the j a j m a n i system in order
that i t m a y t h r o w l i g h t o n the
controversial
question of whether
or not the jajmani system is exploitative, (p 1 ) .
Beidelman revises
Wiser's
definition
of the
jajmani
system
as
"a
feudalistic
system of
prescribed,
hereditary
obligations of payment a n d of occupational
and
ceremonial
duties
between two or more specific f a m i lies of d i f f e r e n t castes in the same
locality" (p 6 ) .
T h e t w o bases o f
this system are caste duties and
l a n d . B u t l a n d tenure is the powerdeterminant
within
the
jajmani
system,
Beidelman first examines the i n fluence of caste on the respective
roles of jajman a n d kamin. ' U p p e r '
castes tend to be jajmans w h i l e
Mower'
castes tend to be kamins.
W h e r e B r a h m i n s possess economicnumerical-political
p o w e r , custom,
dogma,
superiority in
numbers,
p o l i t i c a l connection and control of
land m a y be used to t u r n the jajman-kamin
relationship in
favour
of the B r a h m i n .
B u t instances are
quoted where other castes are m o r e
powerful, economically, numerically
and p o l i t i c a l l y than
the
Brahmins.
How Jajmani Is Exploitative
T h e author shows how the concept of p u r i t y and p o l l u t i o n operates
in
determining
hierarchical
o r d e r i n g of
occupations such as
h a i r - c u t t i n g , w a s h i n g , leather w o r k ,
scavenging, etc. Ceremonial duties
r e i n f o r c e caste roles. Etiquette pervades relations.
The a u t h o r , theref o r e , argues that jajman-kamin relations shape more than mere w o r k
relations. " T h e y stress values in
r i t u a l a n d social l i f e , each complem e n t i n g the other and f o r m i n g a
complex m a t r i x i n w h i c h the econ o m i c relations a r e set" ( p 3 0 ) .
Discussing the
determinants of
the role of jajman, the a u t h o r singles
out
numerical
or
political
s u p e r i o r i t y a n d l a n d t e n u r e as the
t w o f a c t o r s w h i c h m a k e a jajman
effective.
He shows
how control
Monographs of the Associa-
over land enables h i m to coerce the
kamin a n d to o b t a i n f o r himself
services and payments f a r beyond
those r e q u i r e d of the kamin. Hence
jajmani
system
is an
exploitative
system
although it does
provide
social security.
of the
jajman enables h i m to get
p r e f e r e n t i a l payments, e n j o y prestige, a n d other benefits and enables
h i m to f i x caste roles in such a
manner as to stabilise h i s p o s i t i o n
despite the tensions w i t h i n j a j m a n kamin relationships.
The role of kamin lies in p r o v i d i n g necessary services — secular
a n d r i t u a l — f o r the jajman w h i c h
the jajman cannot o b t a i n elsewhere
a n d w h i c h h e cannot s u p p l y h i m self due to lack of s k i l l or of sufficient
n u m b e r s or due to caste
restrictions. T h e s o l i d a r i t y of the
kamin is also m a i n t a i n e d by caste
panchayat ( t r a d e u n i o n ) a n d k i n ship.
But k i n s h i p
also
disrupts
kamin solidarity.
S i m i l a r l y , faction a l i s m of the u p p e r castes affects
the kamins as economic dependence
cuts across caste ties.
Beidelman uses the t e r m jajmani
system to cover the w h o l e of r u r a l
social structure.
B u t it should be
noted that the t e r m cannot be interpreted to cover a l l social relations.
Firstly,
jajman-kamin
relationships are d y a d i c , a n d t e n d to be
l i m i t e d to the sphere of service
relationships, whether economic or
r i t u a l . Secondly,
jajman-kamin relations may develop i n t o p a t r o n client relationship when the b o n d
becomes m o r e
personal, intimate
and m u l t i - f a c e d . F o r instance, a
carpenter w h o is a kamin to a cult i v a t o r m a y also be a debtor or a
tenant e n j o y i n g the patronage o f
his j a j m a n . In such a case jajmankamin relationship acquires the nat u r e of patron-client
relationship.
Land and Social Status
There are conflicts w i t h i n the
jajmani system. T h e y are caused
by
the
d i v i s i o n of jajmani r i g h t s
as a result of increase of population and the g r o w t h of the m a r k e t
economy w i t h increased monetization.
E x t e r n a l p o l i t i c a l influences
have shifted p o w e r to lower a n d
n u m e r i c a l l y stronger castes in some
areas.
A m o n g other causes of such
a s h i f t in p o w e r are : land r e f o r m
laws, e m p l o y m e n t o p p o r t u n i t i e s irrespective of caste, changes in caste
values, education and the breakd o w n of the isolation of the caste
system.
The
author
further
discusses
some
cases of
jajman kamin
disputes and points out that k a m i n ' s
'trade u n i o n i s m ' i s becoming m o r e
a n d m o r e meaningless, because of
a d i s r e g a r d of t r a d i t i o n a l restrictions o n p e r f o r m i n g certain a c t i v i ties
previously
assigned
to the
kamin.
A jajman under an emergency undertakes to do a h i t h e r t o
f o r b i d d e n task.
T h e a u t h o r therefore concludes
that the p o w e r d e t e r m i n a n t i n the
jajmani system is l a n d . T h e concentration of p o w e r in a l a n d e d
g r o u p and the o r d e r i n g o f roles i n
r e l a t i o n to l a n d seems essentially
feudalistic.
T h e superior p o s i t i o n
877
T h i s , however, does not always
happen.
Frequently, the
relation
between a c u l t i v a t o r jajman. a n d a
carpenter kamin stops at the level
of service relationships.
When a
jajman is dissatisfied w i t h the services of a smith, he m a y engage
another. S i m i l a r l y one s m i t h m a y
compete w i t h another to get a r i c h
jajman.
Not the Whole Feudal System
Further,
jajmani system
should
be d i s t i n g u i s h e d f r o m the stratificat i o n based on l a n d t e n u r i a l status
i n t o landlords, n o n - c u l t i v a t i n g tenants, c u l t i v a t i n g tenants and attached and free a g r i c u l t u r a l labourers.
In K e r a l a , however, a tenant or an
a g r i c u l t u r a l labourer p u r e l y i n this
capacity
is not a desavakazhi (a
person h a v i n g h e r e d i t a r y r i g h t s o f
service in a v i l l a g e ) . It is, therefore,
i m p e r a t i v e to restrict the
jajmani
system
to the
economic
and
ritual
service
relationships.
Other relationships such as, caste,
k i n s h i p , patron-client, t e n u r i a l do
overlap.
B u t all these should not
be
subsumed
under the
jajmani
system.
To do this is u n r e a l a n d
June 10, 1961
h i g h l y misleading.
Jajmani system
is not by itself the whole of the
feudalistic
system as the author
thinks but is only a part of feudal
and semi-feudal system.
T h e use of the jajman and Kamin
as blanket terms is an over-simplification, as it ignores vast complexities a n d r i c h regional variations.
The
relationships
between
a Jat
cultivator and his B r a h m i n priest,
carpenter, potter,
barber,
washerm a n , chamar and bhangi have internal variations.
A l l of them are not
addressed as kamins. T h e B r a h m i n
priest a l t h o u g h he serves a r i t u a l l y
lower c u l t i v a t i n g caste, is given due
respect. He is never included in the
list of kamin castes.
The
smiths
occupy a h i g h e r status than chamars
and bhangis. T h e y are addressed as
mislry.
It is chamars and bhangis
w h o are sometimes addressed as
kamins.
Therefore, in
accordance
w i t h the r i t u a l status and the distance between the service castes and
jajman castes in the social
structure, the latter exercise p o l i t i c a l arid
economic control over the
former.
S i m i l a r l y , as in the case of the categ o r y of kamins,
there is great i n ternal v a r i a t i o n w i t h i n the category
of jajmans.
L a n d is owned by many
castes and w i t h i n each caste by many
families
in
different
proportions.
Even
landless households are jaj
mans.
A shop-keeper or trader or
a temple priest who receives g r a i n
payment may not possess any l a n d .
Still they command the services of
kamin castes.
In such a case, association of jajman w i t h l a n d is not
w h o l l y inevitable.
T h e r e f o r e , the
terms jajman and kamin should be
taken to represent categories w i t h i n
w h i c h differences should be expected.
It is a distortion of reality to
i d e n t i f y them as 'classes.'
A t h i r d p o i n t to w h i c h I w o u l d l i k e
to d r a w the attention is that the problem posed by Beidelman, viz whether or not the jajmani system is an
exploitative system, has a misplaced
emphasis.
T h e author accuses w r i t ers such as M N Srinivas and K
Cough f o r not l o o k i n g at it f r o m the
p o i n t of view of s u b j e c t i o n , asymm e t r y and conflict, and instead looki n g f o r interdependence and t r a n quility.
B u t the question whether
jajmani system is
exploitative
or
not loses m u c h of its significance
when this system is seen in the light
of the general p r i n c i p l e s of I n d i a n
social structure w h i c h i m p i n g e u p o n
it,
T h e d i f f e r e n t i a l basis of r i t u a l
THE ECONOMIC WEEKLY
r a n k i n g of castes in a scale of subordination and
super-ordination is
itself 'exploitative' and sets the patt e r n of
subservience.
The
overl a p p i n g of the
secular sources of
power, land and
p o l i t i c a l control,
reinforce the h i e r a r c h y .
The crucial question is what happens when there is a discrepancy
between the r i t u a l and
other elements
of
dominance?
When
a
r i t u a l l y higher caste comes i n t o the
category of kamin, the nature of exp l o i t a t i o n is m o d i f i e d . The logic of
economic e x p l o i t a t i o n does not r u n
its f u l l course. E x p l o i t a t i o n is theref o r e a general aspect of the I n d i a n
caste structure w h i c h is sharpened
by the distance between the jajman
and kamin
castes
in
the
social
structure.
It is b l u r r e d when there
is a discrepancy
between different
elements of
dominance and when
the gap between jajman a n d kamin
castes in the caste h i e r a r c h y is not
wide.
The author seems to have recognized the p o i n t that the jajmani relationships
tend to
reinforce the
values of inequality inherent in the
caste system ( p 2 1 ) ; b u t h e does
not see the p r o b l e m in this perspective. It should be said to the credit
of the author that he also recognizes
a situation where ritual s u p e r i o r i t y
of B r a h m i n s is accompanied by secular dependence.
B u t he explains it
away by m a k i n g an absurd c o m p a r i son of this situation w i t h the posit i o n of a priest in western society
who though n o m i n a l l y ranked h i g h
in society is yet treated as a f u n ctionary at a
w e d d i n g and is only
casually i n v i t e d to the w e d d i n g reception,
( p 19)
T h e position o f
B r a h m i n s is entirely different.
Jajmani
system
is
undergoing
changes.
The intensity and f o r m o f
these changes are not the same hut
vary w i t h
respective jajmans and
kamins because they are d y a d i c relationships.
The changing situation
admits of vast
variations and i m mense
complexities.
Sound generalizations can o n l y be b u i l t u p o n
a careful comparative study of and
intensive research into jajmani systems over
different regions,
Beidelman's is a
significant effort in
this d i r e c t i o n .