Page:The history of caste in India.pdf/42

 When they did not find any reference to the caste in the old book, they would either identify it with some old caste, or might invent some explanation regarding its origin. When they admitted the pretensions to a higher status of a few castes, they depended not on the actual conditions, but on some fiction which was supposed to be misunderstood till then.

The underlying theory was that the laws which define caste status are fixed and known. They are given by the gods. It is the duty of the Pundits to explain the laws.

The question referred to the colleges of Pundits was usually this: Is the claim of a certain caste to being Brāhmana or Kshatriya a true claim or a false one?

But every caste decides for itself whether certain members who have been guilty of irregular conduct should be allowed to remain in the caste, and also whether another caste is fit for intercourse with them and to what extent it is. Consequently, whatever opinion the colleges of the Pundits may give, the actual precedence depends on what a caste can exact. The Sarasvat Brahmins in Mahārāshtra, however, succeeded in proving their claims to Brahminship in the Peshwa's court; but since public opinion was against them, they did not get the status equal to that of other Brahmin castes.

But what does the precedence amount to? This precedence means simply a public opinion that one caste is better than another. It is this public opinion which is fought for even to-day. At present this caste precedence means very little tangible good. But under native rulers it may have been a tangible good. The country is now