Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 5.djvu/201

Rh principles, aad from non-entity. It is also described as coeval with creation, as existing in perfection during the Krita period, and subsequently falling into sin. It is also said that only Brahmans existed at first, the others only at later periods. Then the rationalistic theories of the Santiparvan upset the very foundation of caste ; viz., hereditary transmission of the caste character. It seems clear that when the Yedas were composed, many persons who were not Brahmans acted as priests, and saints, the &quot; preceptors of gods,&quot; by their &quot; austere fervour,&quot; rose from a lower rank to the dignity of Brahmanhood. Originally, indeed, access to the gods by prayer and sacrifice was open to all classes of the community. As the Brabmans grow in political importance, they make religion an exclusive and sacred business. Ve find them deciding questions of succession to the throne, and enforcing their decisions. While in the earlier literature there are several instances of Brahmans receiving instruction from the hands of Kshatriyas, in the Puranas and Manu death is made to overtake Kshatriyas who are not submissive to the Brahmans ; and in one case Visvamitra, the son of Gadhi, actually obtains Brahmanhood as a reward for his submis sion. It seems certain that many of the ancient myths were expressly manufactured by the Brahmans to show their superiority in birth and in the favour of Heaven to the Kshatriyas, a poetical effect which is sometimes .spoiled by their claiming descent from their rivals. This brings us to a consideration of the theories which have been .started to account for the appearance of Bralimanic caste, as it is stereotyped in the Laws of Manu. James Mill, who invariably underestimated the influence on history of &quot; previous states of society,&quot; has suggested that the original division must have been the work of some inspired individual, a legislator or a social reformer, who perceived the advantages which would result from a systematic division of labour. The subordination of castes he accounts for by the superstitious terror and the designing lust of power which have so frequently been invoked to explain the natural supremacy of the religious class. Because the ravages of war were dreaded most after the calamities sent by heaven, he finds that the military class properly occupy the second place. This arrangement he apparently con templates as at no time either necessary or wholesome, and as finally destroyed by the selfish jealousies of caste, and by the degradations which the multiplication of trades made inevitable. Heeren and Klaproth have contended that the division into castes is founded on an original diversity of race, and that the higher castes are possessed of superior beauty. The clear complexion and regular features of the Brahmans are said to distinguish them as completely from the Sudras as the Spanish Creoles were distinguished from the Peruvians. &quot; The high forehead, the stout build, and the light copper colour of the Brahmins and other castes allied to them, appear in strong contrast with the somewhat low and wide heads, slight make, and dark bronze of the low castes &quot; (Stevenson, quoted by Miiller, Chips, ii. p. 327). This explanation is, however, generally conjoined with that founded on the tradition of conquest by the higher castes. There is no doubt that the three castes of lighter colour (traivarnika), the white Brahmans, the red Kshatriyas, the yellow Vaisyas, are, at least in the early hymns and Brahmanas, spoken of as the Aryas, the Sanskrit-speaking conquerors, in contradistinc tion to the dark cloud of the Turanian aborigines Dasyus. In fact arya, which means noble, is derived from arya, which means householder, and was the original name of the largest caste, now called Vaisyas. Roth, in his &quot; Brahma and the Brahmans,&quot; holds that the Yedic people advanced from their home in the Punjab, drove the aborigines into the hills, and took possession of the country lying between the Ganges, the Jumna, and the Vindhya range. &quot; In this stage of complication and disturbance,&quot; he says, &quot;power naturally fell into the hands of those who did not possess any direct authority,&quot; i.e., the domestic priests of the numerous tribal kings. The Sudras he regards as a con quered race, perhaps a branch of the Aryan stock, which immigrated at an earlier period into India, perhaps an autochthonous Indian tribe. The latter hypothesis is opposed to the fact that, while the Sudra is debarred from sharing three important Yedic sacrifices, the Bhagasata Purana expressly permits him to sacrifice &quot;without mantras,&quot; and imposes on him duties with reference to Brahmans and cows which one would not expect in the case of a nation strange in blood. But unless a previous subordination of castes among the conquering race be supposed, it seems difficult to see why the warrior-class, who having contributed most to the conquest must have been masters of the situa tion, should have consented to degradation below the class of Brahmans. The position of the Sudra certainly suggests conquest. But are there sound historical reasons for sup posing that Brahmans and Sudras belonged to different nations, or that either class was confined to one nation? The hypothesis is slightly modified by Meiners, who supposes that instead of one conquest there may have been two successive immigrations, the first immigrants being subdued by the second, and then forming an intermediate class between their conquerers and the aborigines ; or, if there were no aborigines, the mixture of the two immigrant races would form an intermediate class. In the same way Mr Talboys Vheeler suggests that the Sudra may be the original conquerors of the race now represented by the Pariahs. Most of these explanations seem rather to describe the mode in which the existing institutions of caste might be transplanted from one land to another, from a mother land to its colonies, and altered by its new conditions Military conquest, though it often introduces servitude, does not naturally lead to the elevation of the priesthood. It is unscientific to assume large historical events, or large ethnological facts, or the existence of some creator of social order. As Benjamin Constant points out, caste rests on the religious idea of an indelible stain resting on certain men, and the social idea of certain functions being committed tu certain classes. The idea of physical purity was largely developed under the Mosaic legislation ; in fact the internal regulations of the Essenes (who were divided into four classes) resemble the frivolous prohibitions of Brahmanism. As the daily intercourse of men in trade and industry 