New Delhi- As India gears up for a caste census in the coming months, the writings of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, fondly known as Babasaheb, on Untouchables and caste censuses of India remain profoundly relevant. His works provide a detailed account of the enumeration of Untouchables under British rule, with a particular emphasis on the ten tests established in the 1911 Census to distinguish Untouchables from touchable Hindus.

Perhaps very few people know that the counting of untouchables separately from Hindus was done on the demand of the Muslim community, which was a complex process. Who are the untouchables? On what basis should the distinction be made between untouchables and Hindus, this was a challenging task for the then British officials.

In Dr. Baba Sahab Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, Volume 5- Chapter 2 Untouchables- Their Numbers, Baba Saheb has given detailed information about the various censuses.

Baba Saheb wrote in his writings: The first general census of India was taken in the year 1881. Beyond listing the different castes and creeds and adding up their numbers so as to arrive at the total figure of the population of India the Census of 1881 did nothing. It made no attempt to classify the different Hindu castes either into higher and lower or touchable and untouchable. The second general census of India was taken in the year 1891. It was at this census that an attempt to classify the population on the basis of caste and race and grade was made by the Census Commissioner for the first time. But it was only an attempt.

The third general census of India was taken in 1901. At this census a new principle of classification was adopted namely “Classification by Social precedence as recognised by native public opinion”. To this serious opposition was raised by high caste Hindus to the enumeration by caste in the Census Report. They insisted on the omission of the question regarding caste.

This Census of 1901 did not result in fixing the total population of the Untouchables at any exact figure. This was due to two reasons. In the first place no exact tests were applied to determine who is an Untouchable. Secondly a class of the population which was economically and educationally backward but not Untouchable was mixed up with those who were actually Untouchables.

The Ten Tests

The Census of 1911 went a step further and actually laid down ten tests to mark off the Untouchables from those who were Touchables. Under these, tests the Census Superintendents made a separate enumeration of castes and tribes who:

(1) denied the supremacy of the Brahmins;

(2) did not receive the Mantra from Brahmana or other recognized Hindu Guru;

(3) denied the authority of the Vedas;

(4) did not worship the great Hindu Gods;

(5) were not served by good Brahmanas;

(6) have no Brahmin priests at all;

(7) have no access to the interior of the ordinary Hindu temple;

(8) cause pollution;

(9) bury their dead and

(10) eat beef and do not reverence the cow.

The separation of the Untouchables from the Hindus was insisted upon by the Muslims in a memorial to the Government dated 27th January 1910 in which they claimed that their representation in the political bodies of the country should be in proportion to the population of Touchable Hindus and not Hindus as a whole because they contended that the Untouchables were not Hindus.

Be that as it may the Census of 1911 marks the beginning of the ascertainment of the population of the Untouchables. Efforts in the same direction were continued at the Census of 1921 and 1931. As a result of these efforts the Simon Commission which came to India in 1930 was able to state with some degree of surety that total population of Untouchables in British India was 44.5 millions.

The 1931 Census: Methodology and Execution

The 1931 Census, led by J.H. Hutton, covered approximately 271 million people in British India. It utilized the ten tests from 1911 to enumerate Untouchables. Ambedkar noted that this census estimated the Untouchable population at around 44.5 million, a figure endorsed by the Simon Commission in 1930. However, he identified two significant flaws:

1. Inconsistent Application of Tests: The tests for identifying Untouchables were not uniformly applied, leading to inconsistencies.

2. Conflation of Categories: Economically and educationally backward groups, who were not socially Untouchable, were often mixed with Untouchables, skewing the data.

Ambedkar outlined several challenges faced during the 1931 Census:

• High-Caste Opposition: High-caste Hindus opposed caste enumeration, fearing it would diminish their political representation. By 1932, during the Lothian Committee’s franchise investigation, some Hindus even denied the existence of Untouchables.

• Muslim Demand: The 1910 memorandum intensified debates by advocating for the separation of Untouchables from Hindus.

• Political Agitations: Gandhi’s Salt March and the Indian National Congress’s “Census Boycott Sunday” on January 11, 1931, disrupted data collection in some regions.

• Caste Identity Fluidity: Many lower-caste individuals reported higher-caste identities to elevate their social status, complicating accurate enumeration.

• Regional Variations: The lack of uniform caste nomenclature across regions made data aggregation challenging.

Outcome and Significance

Caste data: The 1931 census recorded 4,147 castes, far more than the 1,646 castes of 1901, reflecting the complexity of India's social structure. It identified 68 castes as "untouchable" (renamed "outcaste" in 1931) and granted special status under the Government of India Act 1935.

Political impact: Caste data shaped constitutional changes, such as the Government of India Act 1935. It also fuelled social mobilisation movements, such as the Adi Dharmi community in Punjab declaring a separate identity to avoid classification as Hindu, Sikh or Muslim.

In addition to caste, the census collected information on religion, age, occupation, literacy and linguistic profile. Literacy was defined as the ability to write and read a letter in any language, calculated for people aged five and above.

The national literacy rate was 9.5%, with Brahmins having literacy of about 27% (43.7% for men, 9.6% for women). Literacy was higher in princely states such as Travancore and Cochin (modern Kerala).

The census estimated Other Backward Classes (OBCs) as 52% of the population, which later formed the basis for the Mandal Commission (1980) to recommend 27% OBC reservation.

Criticism: Hutton criticised the earlier varna-based system and called it impractical to administer. The occupation-based system of 1931 was considered more practical, but caste fluidity and regional variations made it complex.

Ambedkar emphasized that the 1931 Census clarified the Untouchable population, enabling the Simon Commission to advocate for their political representation. The census influenced the Government of India Act 1935, which ensured reserved seats for “exterior classes” (Untouchables) in legislatures. It also fueled social mobility movements, such as the Adi Dharmi community in Punjab asserting a distinct identity to avoid classification as Hindu, Sikh, or Muslim.

However, by 1932, high-caste Hindu opposition intensified, as they feared that acknowledging the Untouchable population would reduce their political share. This resistance foreshadowed debates on caste-based policies in independent India.

As India prepares for a new caste census, Ambedkar’s analysis of the 1911 tests and the Muslim demand remains highly relevant. His advocacy for accurate enumeration of Untouchables to address their social exclusion underscores the need for data to inform affirmative action policies today. The challenges he highlighted, opposition from dominant groups, inconsistent methodologies, and socio-political complexities—continue to resonate.