SOCIAL FUNCTIONS OF RELIGION PRE-CAPITALIST 107 of the colonial relationship. The religious movements of social protests, like the one of Sri Narayana Guru, were born as a reaction against the social ruptures brought about by the capitalist economy (especially when land became a commodity). However, they remained inside the characteristics of a caste society, when the new social relationships were becoming more and more of a class type. This is why they privileged the religious system as the main symbol of a society they wanted to transform. On this account we were led to go more deeply into the question of the social functions of religion in capitalist societies. We hope that through this empirical research, and through the reflections which accompany it, we have been able to make our contribution to the work which is now being carried on in this domain—work which should one day lead to an even more complete theory of the functions of religion in pre-capitalist societies. NOTES AND REFERENCES 1. In his preface to 'A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy', Marx included the 'Asiatic mode of production' in his simplified, 'ideal' pictures of the mechanisms by which societies function, and were constructed in order to make their possible evolutions more intelligible. Marx assigned to this form of social logic an exclusive status founded on two principal criteria: 1) the particular form of land-ownership, characterised by the rigidity of community control over individuals, whose access to the means of production depends entirely on their belonging Jto these communities, generally structured according to kinship relations, 2) the objective opposition existing between these basic social units and the state (the higher unit). The basic units are maintained in total dependence on the state (generalised slavery). In short, this is a social model characterised by relations of production established between a despotic political power which arrogates to itself the 'high economic command' in order to ensure the adequate functioning of public works and an access to the surplus produced, and—on the other hand—village units which are themselves- relatively autarchic (self-sufficient). It was because Marx established his model withPreference to situations in Asia that he called this the 'Asiatic mode of production'. But today the analysis of social formations in Africa and Latin America has revealed many similarities with this 'Asiatic' mode of production, so that some of those who follow the Marxist line of thought prefer to speak of the tributary mode of production. 2. This theoretical view is defended by M. Godelier. On this point see his book, Horizon, trajet marxiste en anthropologie^ Maspero, Paris, 1973. 3. See in particular the article, "Buddhism and Politics in South East Asia", in Social Scientist, Oct. 1976 and Nov. 1976, by F. Houtart. Bibliography F. Houtart, Religion and Ideology in Sri Lanka, Hansa Publication, Colombo, 1974. G. Lemerdnier, Religion and Ideology in Kerala, CRSR, Louvain-la-Neuve, 1976