VARNA IDEOLOGY AND SOCIAL CHANGE 43 catalytic in his opinion, for it separated the priesthood from the kshatriya elite and led to the formation of an endogamous iwna-caste system, 'for otherwise', he remarks, 'there is no reason for demarcation into endogamous castes.'8 It is curious that a perceptive scholar like D.D. Kosambi failed to note that his hypothesis regarding the origin of the brahmana caste hardly explains endogamy. In his detailed study of the brahmanical gotras he argues that of the seven sages regarded as the primary founders of the brahmanical gotras only Visvamitra was 'the one real indubitable Aryan', the rest were non-Aryans. In his view the story of the miraculous birth of Vasistha from a jar and his description as the 'first brahmana' are unmistakable proofs of his non-Aryan origin. Even if we grant this,9 we find that the Visvamitras occupy a considerable space in the gotra lists, hence the Aryan priestly group was not numerically insignificant. However, what is more important is the fact that endogamy does not demarcate the Visvamitras from the Vasisthas, rather the two combine to form one endogamous iwmi-caste which is separated from the kshatriya, vaishya and shudra varnas. Thus ethnic isolation does not explain the emergence of an endogamous brahmana caste in the first instance. Of course, endogamy does facilitate the absorption of tribal groups of diverse ethnic origins in a varna/caste system, which allows their incorporation without the loss of their separate identity, a point which has become commonplace in many sociological studies; but as the example of the brahmana caste formation shows, endogamous varna categories emerged when the process of social and ethnic fusion was going on at all levels. Kosambi himself has suggested that a few of the Dasa chiefs eulogized in the Rigvedic hymns may have been survivors of the Harappa culture who were adopted into the Aryan tribes; and there is nothing to show that such absorptions had led to the formation of separate endogamous castes within the folds of the kshatriya of brahmana varna in the vedic period. In our opinion endogamy was practised not to demarcate the Aryan and the non-Aryan but to differentiate occupational categories of varying status and thus had a socio-economic basis. To explain the endogamy of the caste society in terms of racial or ethnic exclusiven^ss is quite fallacious. Endogamy is both a manifestation and a tool for perpetuating class and gender exploitation;10 and once it came to characterize the varna system, it provided the system both strength and flexibility. For, the system could go on expanding an hierarchical society by providing space to alien groups and drawing them in its vortex without doing itself or the notion of hierarchy any serious damage. Thus caste endogamy co-existed with hypergamy which allowed limited mobility in the favour of the upper castes. An exploitative system which has the capacity to enroll the best of whatever rank and origin in its own service is far more pernicious and long-lasting than the one which is absolutely closed and static.