In 1910, Edward Albert Gait, the Census Commissioner for India, issued a highly significant circular ahead of the 1911 Census. This circular was a watershed moment in the history of Indian social and political classification, as it was the first formal attempt by the British Raj to distinguish "Untouchables" (now Dalits/Scheduled Castes) as a group separate from the "Hindu" majority.
The Objective of the Circular
The primary goal of the circular was to identify and group together castes that were traditionally included under the "Hindu" umbrella but did not adhere to standard Brahminical or orthodox Hindu practices. Gait proposed ten tests to determine if a community was truly "Hindu" in the orthodox sense.
The 10 Tests (Questions) in the Circular
Gait asked provincial superintendents to report on castes and tribes that satisfied any of the following conditions:
Denial of Brahminical Supremacy: Castes that did not acknowledge the religious supremacy of Brahmins.
Lack of Mantra: Those who did not receive the mantra (sacred initiation) from a Brahmin or other recognized Hindu guru.
Adherence to the Vedas: Castes that did not recognize the authority of the Vedas.
Worship of Hindu Gods: Those who did not worship the standard Hindu deities (Vishnu, Shiva, etc.).
Service by Brahmins: Communities that were not served by "good" (orthodox) Brahmins as family priests.
Priesthood: Castes that had no Brahmin priests at all, using their own community members instead.
Access to Temples: Those who were denied entry into the interior of ordinary Hindu temples.
Pollution/Untouchability: Castes whose touch or proximity was believed to cause "pollution" to higher-caste Hindus.
Burial Practices: Communities that buried their dead rather than cremating them (which was the orthodox Hindu norm).
Beef Consumption: Castes that ate beef and did not show reverence for the cow.
Historical & Political Impact
The "Gait Circular" triggered a massive political controversy that shaped the future of Indian representation:
Political Alarm: Orthodox Hindu leaders were alarmed by the circular. They feared that if millions of "Untouchables" were removed from the Hindu count, the political "strength" of the Hindu community in the legislative councils (under the Morley-Minto reforms) would drastically shrink.
The Muslim Memorial: The circular was partly a response to a 1909 memorial by Muslim leaders to the Secretary of State, arguing that "Untouchables" were not Hindus and should be counted separately.
Birth of the "Depressed Classes" Category: Although the British eventually backed down slightly due to protests, the data collected through these tests provided the first official count of what would later be called the "Depressed Classes" (1931) and eventually the "Scheduled Castes" (1935).
Dr. Ambedkar’s Stance: Later, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar used this historical precedent to argue for separate electorates, noting that even the British Census Commissioner had recognized that Dalits were a distinct social group with a different religious and social identity from the Caste Hindus.
How Upper Caste Reacted
The objections to the Gait Circular were not merely about religious definitions but were deeply rooted in the preservation of upper-caste political and social hegemony.
During the early 20th century, the British Raj began linking political representation to population numbers. If the "Untouchables" were removed from the Hindu count, the upper castes (who dominated leadership) would have seen their power base collapse.
1. The Fear of "Numerical Extinction"
Upper-caste leaders realized that without the millions of lower-caste and Dalit individuals, the Hindu community would technically become a minority in several provinces compared to the combined strength of other religious groups.
The "Dying Race" Pamphlet: This era saw the rise of the influential pamphlet "Hindus: A Dying Race" by U.N. Mukerji. It argued that unless the lower castes were kept within the Hindu fold, the "upper-caste Hindu civilization" would vanish due to declining numbers.
Control of Resources: By keeping lower castes within the "Hindu" category, upper-caste elites could claim to represent the "majority" in negotiations with the British for government jobs, education funds, and legislative seats.
2. The Strategy: "Unity Without Reform"
The reaction from organizations like the Hindu Mahasabha and the Arya Samaj was strategic. They advocated for "Hindu Unity," but critics—including Dr. B.R. Ambedkar—noted that this unity was often superficial.
The Shuddhi Tactic: The Arya Samaj used Shuddhi (re-conversion/purification) to "upgrade" Dalits just enough to pass the 10 tests of the Gait Circular (like wearing a sacred thread), but they rarely challenged the underlying social hierarchy or granted them equal status in temples or homes.
Opposing Autonomy: When lower-caste groups began demanding their own separate political identity (like the Adi-Dravida or Adi-Hindu movements), upper-caste leaders characterized these demands as "anti-national" or "divisive" to keep them under the broader Hindu umbrella which they controlled.
3. The Shift in Narrative
Before the Gait Circular, many upper-caste elites took pride in their distinctiveness and exclusive ritual status. However, once the Census threatened their numerical dominance:
They shifted from Exclusion (keeping lower castes away from sacred texts/rituals) to Inclusion for Power (claiming lower castes were essential Hindus).
This created a permanent tension in Indian politics: the need for a "Hindu Majority" for electoral strength vs. the maintenance of Caste Hierarchy for social control.
⚖️ The Result: The 1932 Deadlock
This conflict eventually led to the 1932 Poona Pact. When the British granted Dalits separate electorates (recognizing them as a separate political group, as Gait had suggested), Mahatma Gandhi and other leaders went on a hunger strike. They feared the "fragmentation" of the Hindu vote, which essentially meant the loss of upper-caste control over the massive lower-caste voting bloc.
-- END---
The details regarding the Gait Circular and its 10 tests are documented in several primary historical and administrative sources.
1. Primary Administrative Source
The official record of this circular is found in the Census of India, 1911 (Volume I: India - Part I: Report), authored by Sir Edward Albert Gait, the Census Commissioner.
Location: In Chapter IV ("Religion"), particularly in the section discussing the definition of "Hindu."
Original Context: Gait describes the difficulty of defining "Hinduism" for census purposes and lists these ten tests as the criteria he sent to provincial superintendents to identify "partially assimilated Hindus" or communities that were not "genuine Hindus."
2. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar’s Writings
Babasaheb Ambedkar referred to the Gait Circular as a critical piece of evidence to show that the "Untouchables" were historically viewed as a distinct social group.
Source: Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches (BAWS), Volume 5 (Unpublished writings on Untouchables and Untouchability).
His Argument: Ambedkar uses the 1911 Census data to illustrate how the Census was "not a demographic operation but a political affair," noting that Hindu leaders at the time pressured the census department to suppress the distinct counting of these communities to maintain political weight.
3. Historical Monographs & Journals
"Caste and Race in India" by G.S. Ghurye: This classic sociological text discusses the 1911 Census and the political tremors caused by Gait's attempt to classify Hindus based on ritual and social behavior.
The Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (JRAS): Recent historical research papers, such as "Colonial Anthropology and the Decline of the Raj," detail how the Gait Circular was a reaction to the 1909 Muslim Memorial, which first argued for the separate enumeration of the "Depressed Classes."
4. Digital Archives
You can access the original report digitally through the following repositories:
HathiTrust Digital Library: Search for Census of India, 1911, Volume I, Part I.
Internet Archive: The full PDF of the 1911 Census report is available for public download.
Piketty’s Ideology Data: The research team of economist Thomas Piketty has digitized early Indian census reports, which include the detailed tables generated by these 10 tests.
Comments
Post a Comment