re seems no reason
for not considering them a caste. If on the other hand we examine the
subcastes of Bania we find that the majority of them have names derived
from places, [118] not indicating any separate origin, occupation or
status, but only residence in separate tracts. Such divisions are
properly termed subcastes, being endogamous only, and in no other
way distinctive. No subcaste can be markedly distinguished from the
others in respect of occupation or social status, and none apparently
can therefore be classified as a separate caste. There are no doubt
substantial differences in status between the highest subcastes of
Bania, the Agarwals, Oswals and Parwars, and the lower ones, the
Kasaundhan, Kasarwani, Dosar and others. But this difference is not
so great as that which separates different groups included in such
important castes as Rajput and Bhat. It is true again that subcastes
like the Agarwals and Oswals are individually important, but not
more so than the Maratha, Khedawal, Kanaujia and Maithil Brahmans, or
the Sesodia, Rathor, Panwar and Jadon Rajputs. The higher subcastes
of Bania themselves recognise a common relationship by taking food
cooked without water from each other, which is a very rare custom
among subcastes. Some of them are even said to have intermarried. If
on the other hand it is argued, not that two or three or more of the
important subdivisions should be erected into independent castes,
but that Bania is not a caste at all, and that every subcaste should
be treated as a separate caste, then such purely local groups as
Kanaujia, Jaiswar, Gujarati, Jaunpuri and others, which are found in
forty or fifty other castes, would have to become separate castes;
and if in this one case why not in all the other castes where they
occur? This would result in the impossible position of having forty
or fifty castes of the same name, which recognise no connection of
any kind with each other, and make any arrangement or classification
of castes altogether impracticable. And in 1911 out of 200,000 Banias
in the Central Provinces, 43,000 were returned with no subcaste at
all, and it would therefore be impossible to classify these under
any other name.

6. The Banias derived from the Rajputs.

The Banias have been commonly supposed to represent the Vaishyas or
third of the four classical castes, both by Hindu society generally
and by leading authorities on the subject. It is perhaps this view of
th