The Idea of Village and Village Studies
The Indian Village: Historical Evolution and Contemporary Dynamics
Introduction
The Indian village represents a foundational social unit within the broader framework of Indian society. It is characterized by specific demographic, ideological, and structural dynamics, notably shaped by caste, class (with land as a key factor), and gender. Despite its hierarchical structure, Indian villages are tightly-knit, with various caste groups contributing to mutual support and co-existence. They embody the microcosm of India’s complex social fabric, offering a unique insight into the country’s past and present.
Historical Idea of Indian Village
1. Indus Valley Civilization
The roots of rural India can be traced back to the Indus Valley Civilization. Though urban centers flourished for a time, rural and urban structures coexisted. This interdependence was critical, with towns relying on villages for raw materials, food, and labor, while villages depended on urban centers for manufactured goods and markets. This interdependence marked the early stages of the rural-urban divide in India.
Example: Towns and cities provided access to markets, and villages were central for food production and raw materials.
2. Vedic Period
The Vedic period (1500-1000 B.C.) saw the conceptualization of villages in texts like the Rig Veda, which described the village as a place where various social groups coexisted, contributing to the mutual success of each other.
Key Terms:
Pur: Elites or ruling class.
Gram: Commoners or the villagers.
Van: Tribes.
This hierarchical but cooperative system is described in ancient texts, such as the Ramayana, Mahabharata, and Jataka Tales, highlighting the diversity of occupations and social roles in the village community.
3. Relationship Between Villages and the Ruler
The relationship between villages and political rulers was defined through mutual obligations. The Puranic texts and Kautilya’s Arthashastra describe how village leaders (appointed by the Gram) were required to pay taxes to the king in exchange for protection. This exchange marked the beginning of a state-village relationship where protection and resources were balanced.
Caste and Villages: Historical Interlinkage
The structure of Indian villages has always been deeply influenced by caste systems. From the 7th to 12th century CE, several types of villages emerged, demonstrating the flexibility and diversity in village organization:
One caste, one village: Entire villages were often dominated by a single caste group.
One caste, many villages: A caste could spread across multiple villages.
Many castes, one village: A typical village composed of various castes.
Many castes, many villages: Larger clusters of villages, each with a diverse caste population.
The advent of Islam and Christianity further diversified village life, making villages more multi-ethnic and multi-tasked. The impact of these external influences was particularly evident in the formation of specialized villages, like those for artisans.
Example: Babarnama and Ain-i-Akbari mention specialized villages of artisans, showing the complex role of villages in defense against foreign invasions and the specialization of labor.
Example: Al-Biruni’s Kitab al-Hind (early 11th century) provides detailed accounts of caste-based occupational organization in villages.
Indian Villages Before British Rule
1. Geographical and Political Autonomy
Before British colonial rule, Indian villages were relatively independent, benefiting from both geographical and political autonomy.
Geographical Autonomy: Due to poor communication facilities, lack of road connectivity, and geographic isolation, villages operated largely independently of the broader political systems.
Political Autonomy: Kings and rulers allowed villages to manage their day-to-day affairs. Villages were largely self-governing, with local leaders overseeing day-to-day operations without much interference from central authorities.
2. Autonomy in Dispute Settlement
Villages maintained a high degree of autonomy, especially in dispute settlement. Village panchayats (councils) were the traditional institutions responsible for managing local disputes and upholding law and order.
Colonial and Anti-Colonial Views of the Indian Village
Colonial View of the Village
Colonial studies of the Indian village, primarily conducted by British administrators and anthropologists, generally portrayed the village as a closed, isolated, and self-sufficient unit. These studies often reflected the colonial perspective, with the purpose of economic assessment and mapping out the cultural and social landscape of India for administrative control.
1. Colonial Studies and Field Research
Most colonial studies were based on a book-view, but a few field studies emerged with an aim to:
Economic Assessment: To evaluate the agricultural and economic conditions of Indian villages.
Cultural Mapping: To understand the social structures and norms within villages for effective governance.
Example: W.H.R. River's study of the Todas in 1906 was one of the first modern anthropological monographs on an Indian community.
Example: William and Charlotte Wiser's "Behind Mud Walls" (1930), written after five years spent living in a village in the United Provinces, provides a cultural and social portrait of rural India.
2. Indian Village as a 'Closed' and 'Isolated' System
Several colonial scholars viewed the Indian village as a self-contained system, unaffected by external influences.
Key Scholars and Ideas:
Munro, Metcalfe, Maine, Marx, and Baden-Powell considered the village as a "closed" and "isolated" unit. They viewed the village as a traditional, unchanging community with minimal contact with the outside world.
Charles Metcalfe described village communities as "little republics", emphasizing their political autonomy and self-sufficiency.
Features of the 'Little Republic' Concept:
Caste as a central unit: The social organization was based on caste hierarchies.
Politically Autonomous: Villages governed themselves without external interference.
Economically Self-sufficient: Villages were largely self-reliant through Jajmani relationships, where services and goods were exchanged within the community.
Closed System: Villages were isolated, with little external influence. They were seen as places of social harmony, governed by patriarchal norms, and resistant to individualism.
Example: The Uttarameruru Inscription from the Chola dynasty provides evidence of a self-governing village with an organized electoral system for local governance.
3. Monolithic and Idyllic Views of the Indian Village
The colonial view often presented the Indian village as an idyllic, harmonious entity.
Monolithic Structure: The village was seen as having complete social harmony, where caste groups worked together seamlessly. This view emphasized functional integration and downplayed internal conflicts.
Idyllic Social Reality: Orientalist scholars romanticized the village as a stable and peaceful unit. They believed that the Varna system and caste hierarchies ensured functional integration and social cohesion among different occupational groups (castes).
Example: Adrian Mayer used the term "Village Patriotism" to describe how villagers identified with their village as a cohesive territorial unit, where loyalty and respect were tied to the village's image and reputation.
4. Marxist View of the Indian Village
From a Marxist perspective, Indian villages were initially seen as non-capitalist entities, lacking industry, class exploitation, or surplus. People followed traditional occupations passed down from their ancestors, and class consciousness was minimal. However, the arrival of British colonialism, with the land tenure system and resource extraction, led to the emergence of class consciousness and feudalism.
Marx's View: Marx considered the British colonization of India as a tool for exploitation, breaking the existing social order and introducing new class dynamics. Villages, once isolated and self-sufficient, were drawn into a global economic system that eventually created social stratification.
Anti-Colonial View of the Indian Village
1. Cultural Distinctiveness of the Village
In contrast to the colonial view, some scholars emphasized the cultural distinctiveness of the Indian village, rejecting the idea of it as a political or economic unit. They argued that villages should be understood as cultural units with their unique social and cultural dynamics.
Key Scholars and Views:
Baden Powell, L.S.S. O'Malley, and Grigson: These scholars focused on the cultural aspects of the village, noting the role of caste, rituals, and local deities. They highlighted the struggle for power within the village, and how economic conflicts were resolved through cultural means.
Example: The deity worship in villages, which often serves as a central cultural feature, plays an important role in the integration of social groups.
2. Karl Marx's Anti-Colonial Perspective
Marx's theory of the Asiatic Mode of Production suggested that Indian villages were ruled by despotic rulers from central cities, who extracted surplus from rural areas. The colonial land tenure system, according to Marx, undermined India's political and economic freedom by consolidating wealth and centralizing power.
Marx's Argument: Marx argued that British colonialism transformed India from a non-class society to a feudal system, and eventually into a capitalist society. The extraction of resources from villages by the British created a surplus, which led to the development of class exploitation and economic stagnation.
Nationalist View of the Indian Village
1. Gandhi's Perspective on the Village
Mahatma Gandhi saw the village as the heart of India, embodying the country's true culture and values. He believed that India's future depended on the development of its villages, and he proposed a vision that emphasized self-sufficiency, self-governance, and cooperative values.
Key Ideas of Gandhi:
Self-Sufficiency: Gandhi advocated for villages to be economically self-reliant through the revival of traditional industries, such as hand-spinning and weaving (e.g., the Khadi movement).
Self-Governance: He promoted village panchayats (local councils) to govern themselves without external interference, emphasizing decentralized governance at the grassroots level.
Limited Needs: Gandhi's philosophy of simple living and high thinking encouraged a lifestyle with minimal material needs and a focus on spiritual and moral growth.
Unity: He saw villages as being places of mutual cooperation, where people of all caste and creed could live harmoniously, working together for the welfare of the community.
Peaceful Life: Gandhi envisioned a peaceful rural society based on non-violence (Ahimsa) and truth (Satya), promoting the values of social harmony and cooperation.
Participatory Development: Gandhi believed in grassroots development, with local communities taking the lead in their own progress, particularly through cooperative farming and local self-help.
Example: Gandhi's concept of "Sarvodaya" (welfare of all) aimed at the upliftment of the entire society through cooperative efforts, where the development of villages was integral to the national growth.
2. Ambedkar's Critique of the Village
Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, in contrast to Gandhi, viewed the village as a site of oppression, especially for the Dalits and marginalized groups. He believed that the village was not a place of cooperation, but one where discrimination, feudalism, and caste-based oppression were deeply entrenched.
Key Ideas of Ambedkar:
Feudalism and Casteism: Ambedkar argued that the village reinforced the feudal system and perpetuated Brahmanical domination. The village, in his view, was a space where caste-based inequalities were most visible and reinforced.
Anti-Humanism: Ambedkar saw the village as promoting anti-human values, where injustice and inequality were institutionalized through practices like untouchability.
Caste Ideology in Village Panchayats: Ambedkar criticized village panchayats for upholding caste-based hierarchies and social dogmas, arguing that they promoted superstition and casteist ideologies, rather than fostering unity and equality.
Oppression and Social Injustice: For Ambedkar, the village republic represented an obstacle to social justice and equality, as it was a site of rigid social norms and entrenched caste-based oppression.
Example: Ambedkar's Annihilation of Caste essay highlighted the role of caste discrimination in rural society and the ways in which traditional village structures contributed to the perpetuation of social injustice.
3. Nehru's Middle Path
Jawaharlal Nehru offered a more balanced approach, recognizing the importance of preserving village culture while advocating for modernization. His vision sought to bridge the gap between Gandhi's ideal of rural self-sufficiency and Ambedkar's critique of caste oppression in villages.
Key Ideas of Nehru:
Modernization of Villages: Nehru stressed the need for villages to connect with the national economy, through infrastructure development, education, and technology. He recognized that development in India’s villages had been neglected and needed to be integrated into the broader development plan of the nation.
National Integration: Nehru emphasized the unity of villages in the national context, stating that the cultural wealth of villages, including dance, drama, music, and folk traditions, contributed to the overall identity of India.
Village as a Cultural Hub: Nehru viewed each village as a storehouse of cultural heritage, contributing to the diverse and rich national culture. He encouraged the integration of village culture into the mainstream, while also pushing for economic and social modernization.
Example: Nehru's Discovery of India expressed his belief that villages were a treasure trove of India's cultural richness. However, he also saw that lack of connectivity and infrastructure—such as poor access to highways—hindered the potential for rural development.
Modernization with Preservation of Culture: Nehru proposed a middle path that involved preserving cultural values while pushing for technological advancement and economic progress to integrate villages into the modern national economy.
Geographical View of Indian Villages
The geographical view of Indian villages focuses on settlement patterns and the way they impact social structures, interpersonal relationships, and lifestyles. Geographers use these patterns to understand the spatial organization of villages, while sociologists analyze how these patterns influence social organizations and community dynamics. The statement by Durkheim that "sociology starts where demography ends" emphasizes the importance of spatial factors in social relationships and structures within rural areas.
Types of Settlement Patterns in Rural Areas:
1. Nucleated Settlements
Description: In nucleated settlements, houses are clustered together in a tight formation, often with fields surrounding them. These settlements tend to have a compact structure, with closely-knit communities that promote interactions and cooperation among villagers.
Features:
Centralized village with a defined core area.
Surrounding agricultural fields are often in concentric circles around the settlement.
There may be satellite hamlets or outlying settlements attached to the main village, contributing to a larger rural network.
Examples:
Punjab, where most villages are nucleated due to the intensive agricultural practices.
Parts of Uttar Pradesh and Haryana also show nucleated patterns in the Gangetic plains.
2. Linear Settlements
Description: Linear settlements are characterized by houses that are arranged along a road or a river, creating a linear formation. Each house is generally surrounded by its own compound, but the village’s physical boundary is not distinctly marked. These settlements often evolve along natural features or transportation routes, such as roads or rivers.
Features:
Houses are arranged in a linear fashion, often along a road or riverbank.
Less clear demarcation between the boundaries of different villages.
Social and economic activities are aligned with the linear structure, such as farming, transportation, and trade.
Examples:
Kerala, where coastal regions have settlements along the shoreline.
Konkan coast, delta lands of Bengal, and other river-dominated landscapes also exhibit this settlement pattern.
3. Scattered Settlements
Description: Scattered settlements are characterized by widely dispersed homes or small clusters of houses spread over a large area. The villages themselves may not be easily defined or demarcated, and the settlements often lack a central focal point. This pattern is common in regions with difficult terrain or sparse population.
Features:
Villagers live in isolated homes or small clusters, often over large distances.
There is minimal centralization or community infrastructure, leading to a more individualistic lifestyle.
These settlements are often found in regions where agricultural activities are less intensive or where the terrain makes centralized settlements impractical.
Examples:
Himalayan foothills and highland areas of Gujarat.
Satpura range in Maharashtra, and rural areas in the Western Ghats.
Tribal areas with scattered hamlets or settlements due to geographical isolation.
Sociological Implications of Settlement Patterns
Each settlement pattern influences social relationships, economic activities, and village dynamics:
Nucleated Settlements: Tend to foster stronger social ties due to the close proximity of households, facilitating cooperation and community support. This pattern often allows for more effective village governance and collective action in agriculture, festivals, and social matters.
Linear Settlements: Can lead to a more fragmented social structure, where individuals or families may be more independent. However, transportation routes and communication lines provide avenues for external connections, which may bring economic benefits or influence from nearby urban areas.
Scattered Settlements: Social interactions are often more individualized, with less community cohesion compared to nucleated settlements. These settlements may experience greater isolation, but the relationship between the land and the people tends to be more direct and self-reliant. Land management practices in such areas are often more traditional and personalized.
Post-Independence View of Villages: A Shift from the "Little Republic" Concept
The post-independence view of villages in India emphasizes their integration into the larger socio-political and economic systems of the country, challenging the older notions of villages as isolated, self-sufficient entities or "little republics." This view emerged through field studies and critiques of earlier colonial and idealized depictions of rural life.
Impact of British Rule
Communication and Administration: The British improved communication and established a centralized administrative system in villages. This resulted in reduced autonomy for traditional village institutions like the panchayats, while also increasing the integration of villages into the wider economy and political structure.
Administrative and Legal Connections: The British government introduced revenue officers and police in villages, alongside law courts and a uniform legal system that applied across British India. This reduced the self-governing nature of villages and tied them more closely to colonial governance structures.
Village Studies: Challenging Colonial and Idealized Views
Field studies conducted from the 1950s to the 1980s explored the social realities of villages, uncovering that they were never truly self-sufficient or isolated as portrayed by colonial theorists.
On Self-sufficiency: Studies revealed that Indian villages were never entirely self-sufficient. They had always maintained connections with larger societal and cultural centers. For example, Andre Beteille’s study of Sripuram found no evidence that the village was economically self-sufficient.
On Isolation: Contrary to the image of the isolated village, field studies highlighted that villages were always part of a larger social, political, and economic network. M. N. Srinivas' research in Rampura, Mysore emphasized that villages were not isolated, but part of a broader regional entity with interdependencies.
The Village as a Social Unit
Louis Dumont’s Three Meanings of 'Village Community':
Political Society: The village acted as a political unit.
Co-owners of the Soil: The community shared collective ownership over land.
Symbol of Traditional Economy and Polity: The village epitomized a self-contained but interdependent economic and social system.
Not a Monolithic Structure: SC Dube observed that despite presenting itself as an ordered whole, the village was often marked by internal factions and status differentiation. Factors such as caste, wealth, land ownership, age, and religious position contributed to inequality within the village structure.
Caste Mobility and Social Structure
M. N. Srinivas challenged the colonial conception of the caste system as rigid and unchanging. Through his concepts of Sanskritization and the Dominant Caste, he showed that while the caste system was hierarchical, there was room for social mobility, especially for castes in the middle ranks.
Caste Mobility: The idealized "Varna system" was not as rigid as colonial narratives suggested. For instance, caste mobility existed at the empirical level, with some villages offering upward mobility through processes like Sanskritization.
Jajmani System: The Jajmani system, which structured the exchange of services between castes, has declined due to technological advancements and increased urbanization, which provided alternative sources of employment and income.
Social Networks and Social Change
Social Networks: Sociologists like Andre Beteille emphasized the importance of kinship networks and political networks in rural areas, which were overlooked by the British. These networks connected villages both within and across regions, fostering cooperation and interaction.
Social Changes: Structural changes such as land reforms, the Panchayati Raj system, and the rise of Sanskritization have led to significant shifts in the social fabric of villages.
B.R. Chauhan’s Four Village Types:
One village, one caste.
One village, many castes.
One caste, many villages.
Many castes, many villages. These classifications reflect the diversity of social organization and highlight the complex, interconnected nature of rural India.
The Decline of the Jajmani System and Emergence of New Structures
The Jajmani system of service exchange has declined due to factors such as increased urban contact and technological advancements in agriculture. However, kinship and caste relations continue to play a significant role in rural life, influencing marriage patterns and social organization.
The British Contribution to Social Differentiation
Zamindari System: The zamindars, often upper-caste landowners, collected revenue for the British government. This system entrenched social hierarchies and land ownership structures, contributing to long-lasting inequalities.
Ryotwari System: In contrast, the Ryotwari system gave peasants direct control over land, but they were still subject to heavy taxation and were often economically disadvantaged.
Internal Differentiation: Scholars like Karve and Kolenda showed that villages were not homogenous but had variations in kinship systems, family structures, and economic roles, indicating internal social differentiation.
Critique of Self-Sufficiency: Economic and Political Connections
Economic Dependence: Villages depended on external markets, with haats (markets) facilitating trade between villages. Agricultural practices were often tied to land in other territories, indicating that villages were not self-sufficient.
Political Dependence: Disputes were resolved by institutions like Jati Sabhas and Gram Sabhas, which involved members from other villages and different castes. This suggests that villages were not self-governing.
Kinship and Religious Connections: Villages were part of larger kinship and religious networks, with festivals and rituals serving as a point of social cohesion across villages.
McKim Marriott and Morris Opler’s Perspectives
McKim Marriott's concept of Universalization and Parochialization explains how local cultural traditions and practices in villages spread to urban areas and vice versa, illustrating the interconnectedness of rural and urban life.
Morris Opler pointed out that the trade networks between villages and coastal regions allowed the exchange of goods, further highlighting the economic interdependence of villages.
Rural and Agrarian Unrest in Present Times
Colonial Revolts
Dhanagre's View: Many colonial revolts were unorganized, often inspired by religious ideologies or millenarian dreams.
Guha's Contribution: A leading figure in 'Subaltern Studies,' Guha argued that the history of the peasantry during colonial rule was overshadowed by elite narratives of nationalism. He emphasized the autonomy of peasant consciousness and the "politics of the people."
Phule's Perspective: Phule criticized the conditions of farmers under British rule, blaming the government officials (mostly Brahmins and Vaishyas) for their exploitation.
Naxalbari Movement (1967)
Background: The Naxal movement was inspired by Maoist ideology, focusing on armed revolution and class struggle. It started as a peasant rebellion in West Bengal over land disputes and spread to other regions like Chhattisgarh, Odisha, and Andhra Pradesh.
Objectives and Methods: The movement aimed to establish a people's government and overthrow the existing landlord system through armed insurgency.
Key Causes:
Class conflict between big farmers and ordinary peasants.
Demands for land distribution and regulation of benami land.
Prevalence of exploitative practices like begar (forced labor).
Judicial bias favoring big farmers.
Farmer's Protests 2020
Background: The Indian government's new farm laws were perceived to reduce intermediary influence and provide farmers with more market access. However, farmers feared that these laws would lower farm prices and undermine the Minimum Support Price (MSP) system.
Foucauldian Discourse Analysis: The power imbalance between the state and farmers highlighted how farmers' agency was overlooked.
Mode of Protest: The farmers used ideals from B.R. Ambedkar’s constitutional state and Gandhi’s satyagraha. Their protests, notably in Delhi, were peaceful yet firm, drawing moral support rather than political lobbying.
Gender Dimension: Women farmers often returned to their homes rather than demand economic rights or participate in political bargaining.
Farmer Suicides
Statistics: Between 1995 and 2004, the number of farmer suicides rose sharply. The National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) data showed a significant increase in 2021.
Theoretical Perspectives:
Neuropsychological Phenomenon: Individualistic roots are examined by mental health experts to understand specific vulnerabilities to suicide.
Socio-Economic Circumstances: Durkheim’s theory suggests that high social regulation (fatalistic suicide) and low social integration (anomic suicide) contribute to higher suicide rates.
Case Study Findings: Factors like loss of social ties, marital disputes, and economic pressure due to failed crops contributed to suicides.
Region-Specific Issues: Between 1997 and 2013, 80% of suicides were concentrated in seven states, highlighting a geographical pattern linked to agricultural distress.
Reasons for Farmer Suicides:
Economic Dependence: Farmers, particularly in regions without irrigation, are vulnerable to crop failures and debt, leading to suicides.
Rural-Urban Gap: Urban elites often perceive farmers as uninformed, exacerbating the disconnect between rural and urban societies.
Gandhian Influence: Gandhi’s emphasis on non-violence led to a peaceful yet agonizing protest strategy that drew attention to the farmers' plight.
Commercialization of Agriculture: Cash crop farmers, who are more vulnerable to market fluctuations, face a higher suicide risk, as noted by P. Sainath.
Unsustainable Agriculture:
Environmental Costs: The overuse of agrochemicals and unsustainable farming practices have led to water contamination, soil degradation, and loss of biodiversity.
Globalization's Impact: Vandana Shiva highlighted the ecological and social costs of globalized, chemically-dependent agriculture.
Technological Influence: Modern communication technologies have allowed farmers to organize and mobilize for their causes more effectively, bridging the gap between rural communities.
Relative Deprivation:
Social Status: Farmers, especially those owning land, have economic power but remain socially inferior to upper-caste zamindars, reflecting a complex interplay between economic and social status.
Divisions in Rural Society
Definition of Factions
A faction is a small group within a community, formed based on political ideology, caste dynamics, or personality conflicts. Factions serve the interests of a specific minority group, often focusing on political, social, and economic advantages.
A village is divided into factions according to the relationships among families, which can be:
Animosity and Hostility: Families or groups are in conflict, leading to intense rivalries.
Friendly Cooperation: Families or groups that cooperate for mutual benefits.
Indifference: Families that remain neutral and self-reliant, without engaging in factional politics.
Types of Factions
Family or Friendly Cooperation: Factions can emerge from family dynamics, where extended families or kin groups form alliances based on shared interests.
Examples:
Large Landed Families: Peasant families with significant landholdings.
Small Landholders: Families with smaller land parcels.
Landless Laborers: Families reliant on labor and dependent on others for sustenance.
Caste-based Factions: Groups formed based on caste affiliation or support for a specific political party or religious ideology.
Animosity and Hostility: Conflicts in rural areas often arise from:
Rivalries and personality clashes.
A decline in the authority of village headmen, who are often sidelined by more powerful faction leaders.
Indifference: Some families remain neutral, maintaining independence and avoiding involvement in village factionalism.
Causes Behind Formation of Factions
Social Causes:
Caste feuds, family disputes, and societal divisions often lead to factionalism.
These socially disruptive factors persist in rural societies, causing fragmentation.
Economic Causes:
Economic disparities contribute to the formation of factions. When certain groups or families in the village accumulate wealth, they seek to protect their interests, often leading to the formation of faction-based alliances.
Economic needs (such as labor or support) prompt individuals to form small groups to secure their survival.
Political Causes:
Rural areas play a significant role in Indian politics. Political parties try to influence village dynamics, which results in factional divisions during elections.
Political parties’ interference in local governance, such as Gram Panchayat elections, leads to increased political factionalism in villages.
Psychological Causes (As studied by Oscar Lewis):
Factionalism in rural areas often stems from personal or family-related issues, including:
Inheritance Disputes: Quarrels over property division.
Succession Disputes: Conflicts over the adoption of male children for succession.
Land and Irrigation Rights: Tensions surrounding access to agricultural resources.
Sexual Offenses: Conflicts arising from perceived sexual misconduct.
Murders and Feuds: Violent acts can escalate factional rivalries.
Caste Rivalries: Tensions between different caste groups lead to the formation of competing factions.
Inter-Factional Relationships
Governed by Leaders: The relationship between rival factions is heavily influenced by the quality of leadership within each faction:
Cordial Relationships: If faction leaders are benevolent, considerate, and generous, inter-factional relationships can remain cordial and peaceful.
Bitter Relationships: If leaders are intolerant, selfish, and aggressive, inter-factional relationships are likely to be hostile and conflict-ridden.
M.N. Srinivas' Study of Indian Village
Background:
After completing his studies at Oxford, M.N. Srinivas conducted an in-depth study of Rampur, a village in Mysore, which was later published in his book The Remembered Village (1976).
Influences:
Radcliffe-Brown: Influenced Srinivas in terms of structural-functionalism, particularly his work on the Andamans.
W.H.R. Rivers: His study of the Todas in Nilgiri influenced Srinivas’ understanding of tribal and rural societies.
Objectives:
Main Aim: To understand Indian society, which Srinivas considered essentially a caste society.
He studied various dimensions of Indian society, including religion, family, caste, and village life.
Highlights of the Study
1. Cultural Nationalism:
Srinivas linked the identity of Indian traditions to caste, village, and religion.
He believed the Indian social structure was aligned with the advocates of Hindutva, promoting a view of cultural nationalism.
2. Economic and Technological Development:
Srinivas advocated for changes in caste, religion, and family structures to accommodate economic and technological advancements.
However, he sidestepped addressing the lower segments of society, such as the "untouchables".
3. Social Evils:
He addressed the social evils inherent in the caste system, notably the oppression of lower castes.
Srinivas advocated for Westernization and modernization as paradigms for social change.
His perspectives on change were often aligned with Brahminical Hinduism or traditionalism, suggesting reforms within the traditional framework rather than a radical break from it.
4. Secularism:
Srinivas rejected secularism, believing it was inadequate to solve India’s cultural and spiritual crises.
He posited that a philosophy rooted in God as the creator and protector, rather than secular humanism, was needed for India's future.
5. Sanskritization:
Srinivas introduced the concept of Sanskritization, a process where lower castes or tribes adopt the customs, rituals, and practices of higher castes.
Definition: Sanskritization is when a lower caste, tribe, or group modifies its lifestyle to align more closely with higher castes, typically the twice-born castes.
This concept reflects Srinivas’ affinity with Hindutva ideology of cultural nationalism.
6. The Remembered Village:
In his classic work The Remembered Village, Srinivas portrayed the changing dynamics in rural South India.
He highlighted three significant character types in Rampura:
The village headman and landlord of the old order.
The broker between the village and the outside world, facilitating economic and social transactions.
Example: World War II led to increased wealth for dominant castes, like the Vokkaligas, who used their resources to manipulate supply and create artificial shortages.
7. Non-Hindu Presence:
Srinivas’ study also explored the interaction between Hindu and non-Hindu segments within rural communities.
While identifying himself as an Indian sociologist, he maintained an objective stance, analyzing the social institutions of Hinduism through intensive fieldwork.
8. Identification with Village:
Insults to one’s village were seen as equivalent to insults to one’s family or wife, highlighting the deep sense of loyalty and honor tied to one’s village.
9. Gender Dynamics:
Srinivas’ understanding of gender placed women within the household and kinship group, while men operated in a more heterogeneous public sphere.
Women's roles were predominantly domestic and kin-based, while men's roles extended beyond the home.
Example: Men were responsible for controlling the domestic economy, including making grain payments to artisans and service castes for their labor during harvest.
S.C. Dubey and His Study of Indian Villages
Background:
Prof. Shyama Charan Dubey is credited with pioneering rural studies in India. His book An Indian Village is based on his study of Shamirpet village, located near Hyderabad.
The study was conducted in 1951-52 and published in 1955 in London.
Two Important Features of the Study:
Comprehensive Study: Dubey's study of Shamirpet village provides an all-round analysis of village life, presenting it in a detailed yet simple and accessible manner.
Methodological Innovation: This study was a significant methodological effort, introducing a structured approach to rural sociology by Prof. S.C. Dubey himself.
Highlights of the Study:
1. Approach:
Structural-Functional Approach: Dubey applied a structural-functional approach, focusing on how various components of the village system interacted and functioned.
2. Feature of Village:
Semi-Autonomous: Dubey recognized the semi-autonomous nature of Indian villages but rejected the idea that villages were static, timeless, or unchanging.
He argued that a single village could not represent rural India in its entirety, as it failed to encompass the full cultural diversity of rural communities.
3. Basis of Village Communities:
According to Dubey, Indian village communities were organized around three key factors:
Caste: The central organizing principle, influencing roles and status.
Kinship: The ties of family and kin that influenced social relationships.
Territorial Affinities: The connection to specific lands or territories, which were often inherited or assigned.
These factors were linked to wider societal structures, influencing social life both within and beyond the village.
4. Division of Villages:
Dubey classified Indian villages into three broad types based on their settlement patterns:
Single Settlement Villages: Villages with a single, centralized settlement.
Nucleated Villages: Villages where houses and people are concentrated in a central area, forming a dense settlement.
Dispersed Villages: Villages with a scattered or spread-out settlement structure.
5. Inequality:
In contrast to the colonial perception of Indian villages as monolithic structures with harmonious social relations, Dubey identified six factors that led to status differentiation or inequality within the village:
Caste and Religion: Deep-rooted social stratification.
Land-ownership: Those who owned land had a significant economic advantage.
Wealth: Financial prosperity contributed to social differentiation.
Position in Government Service and Village Organization: Higher social status was linked to roles in governance or official village structures.
Age: Older individuals generally had higher status due to wisdom and experience.
Distinctive Personality Traits: Personal charisma or leadership qualities could elevate an individual’s social standing.
6. Factions:
Despite the apparent unity of the village, factions existed within the village structure. These were often created based on economic, political, and social divisions among different groups.
7. Village Solidarity:
Dubey emphasized that village solidarity was distinct from solidarity based on kin, caste, or class.
Village unity was a form of social organization that was shaped by collective interests, although it coexisted with internal divisions and inequalities.
8. Power Dynamics:
Dubey highlighted how lower or menial caste panchayats (village councils) played a role in uniting the lower castes to secure their employment and bargaining power with the dominant land-owning castes.
This demonstrated a power struggle within the village, as lower castes sought to negotiate better terms for labor and resources.
9. Gender Dynamics:
Patriarchy was dominant in Shamirpet village, with gender roles strictly defined.
It was considered respectable for women to maintain a submissive posture, symbolized by walking with their eyes lowered.
Women's roles were largely domestic and confined to the private sphere, while men controlled the public and economic activities.
Other Village Studies in India
1. Village, Caste, and Kinship Networks:
The Jajmani system forms a network of vertical interdependence between castes in villages, crossing the horizontal ties of caste and kinship across different villages.
Oscar Lewis: In comparing the Indian village of Ranikhera with the Mexican village Tepostalan, Lewis observed rural cosmopolitanism in India, where a single village like Ranikhera maintained ties with up to 400 villages for kinship and economic relationships.
2. McKim Marriott on Kinship:
In Kishangarhi, Marriott observed 46 local lineage groups, each distinct in terms of descent. There was no inter-marriage within the village or between these groups.
3. Robert Redfield’s Notion of ‘Little & Great Tradition’:
Marriott also borrowed Redfield's concept of the interaction between Little and Great Tradition in his study.
Universalization (from Little to Great Tradition) and Parochialization (from Great to Little Tradition) were observed:
Universalization: Example—Raksha Bandhan coincides with the local Saluno festival in Kishangarhi, where women return to visit their parents and siblings.
Parochialization: The festival of Gobhardhan (cow-nourisher worship) in Kishangarhi, derived from Sanskritic tradition, is explained as the worship of cow dung wealth.
4. Louis Dumont:
Studied the Piramalai Kallar of Tamil Nadu, focusing on their social organization, especially their marriage system.
5. TN. Madan:
Conducted a study on the nature of kinship and family within the Kashmiri Pandits community.
6. Sachchidananda:
Undertook intensive fieldwork among certain tribal groups in Bihar and Jharkhand to understand their social structure.
7. Martin Oran:
Focused on the impact of industrialization on the Santhals, a tribal community in India.
8. Economic Integration in Modern Times:
1. McKim Marriott’s Economic Integration:
Studied the interaction between different villages around Kishangarhi in Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh. He documented how Brahmin priests, carpenters, barbers, weavers, potters, and washermen serve hereditary patrons across different villages.
2. M.S.A. Rao:
Studied the growth of the metropolitan city of Delhi and its impact on the Yadavpur village on the fringes of the city. The growth of urban areas led to market gardening, dairy and poultry farming, trading, and transport as new livelihood opportunities.
The development of cities resulted in increased demand for housing as immigrant workers moved to these areas.
The urbanization process, however, led to the loss of village land, threatening the village’s existence.
3. Dipankar Gupta:
Proposed the term 'Rurban' (Rural-Urban) to describe the shift in rural areas. He argued that rural India is integrated into urban economies, and the traditional notion of village India is shrinking.
Villagers are no longer completely dependent on agriculture and are increasingly attached to urban economic systems.
4. Surinder Jodhka:
Noted that despite regional variations, Indian villages today are more integrated into urban economies and the liberalized economy of India.
Casteism remains significant, and occupational caste relationships are still prevalent in both rural and urban settings.
9. Caste and Migration:
1. F.G. Bailey:
Studied the village of Bisipara in Orissa, documenting the changes that occurred when land in the village came to the market.
2. Scarlett Epstein:
Studied the impact of irrigation and the Green Revolution on landholdings and caste relations in South Indian villages.
3. GS Bhalla and GK Chadda:
Studied the impact of the Green Revolution (GR) and land reforms (LR) in 20 villages in Punjab. The benefits of these reforms were mainly pocketed by wealthy farmers who controlled resources like seeds, credit, and irrigation cooperatives.
4. K. Gough:
Studied migration patterns in Kumbapettai:
Upper Caste Migration: Brahmins migrated to towns for education and employment.
Lower Caste Migration: Lower caste individuals migrated from less fertile areas to Kumbapettai, leading to increased interaction with the broader economic system.
Agricultural Modernization: This led to the consolidation of class divisions among farmers, including the emergence of the big bourgeoisie, rich farmers, and semi-proletariat.
10. Gender and Village:
1. Uma Chakravarthy:
In her book Gender in Caste, she highlighted the cultural exploitation of Brahmin women, who were expected to perform demanding domestic duties. At the same time, Dalit women faced both physical and cultural exploitation.
2. Tulsi Patel:
In her study of villages in Rajasthan, Patel observed that women often became mother-in-laws at a young age (around 36). She also noted that women believed their sons could protect them from the physical abuse inflicted by their husbands.
11. Politics and Village:
1. Anand Chakravarthy:
Studied Devisar village, observing a shift in political power from traditional domination to a mix of traditional, legal-rational, and charismatic forms of authority.
2. Rudolph and Rudolph:
Studied 20 villages in Uttar Pradesh, concluding that voting behavior in rural India was not based solely on caste. Family and kinship also played an important role in village politics.
3. F.G. Bailey:
Studied the panchayat raj institution and its impact on the village of Bisipara. He observed the growing role of local self-governance and political change within villages.