Click here to join telegram group
Village studies form one of the most important foundations of Indian sociology. Since independence, Indian sociologists and social anthropologists have focused on understanding the social structure, kinship, caste, and power relations in the Indian village. These studies provided valuable insights into continuity and change in rural India, bridging anthropology and sociology.
The pioneer of village studies in India is widely recognized as Prof. M. N. Srinivas, whose pioneering ethnographic work “Remembered Village” and earlier “Religion and Society among the Coorgs of South India” laid the methodological and conceptual foundations for the empirical study of Indian villages.
M. N. Srinivas: The Pioneer of Village Studies
Major Contributions
- Fieldwork Tradition in Indian Context
- Srinivas emphasized participant observation and fieldwork as the backbone of sociology.
- He was the first to conduct intensive ethnographic studies in Indian villages, combining anthropological methods with sociological questions.
- Key Concepts Introduced
- Sanskritization – The process by which lower castes adopt upper-caste rituals to climb the social hierarchy.
- Dominant Caste – The caste which enjoys socio-economic and political dominance in a village due to numerical strength and landownership.
- Westernization – The process of change brought by contact with Western education and institutions.
- Notable Works
- Religion and Society among the Coorgs of South India (1952)
- Village, Caste and Gender in Modern India (1998)
- The Remembered Village (1976)
- Approach
- Focused on structure and process, studying the dynamic aspects of caste and power rather than static descriptions.
- Viewed the village as part of a larger civilizational continuum, not an isolated community.
Significance: Srinivas established a “field-view sociology” distinct from the “book-view” of Indologists who relied on texts rather than lived realities.
Other Major Indian Sociologists and Their Contributions
1. S. C. Dube
- Work: Indian Village (1955) – based on Shamirpet village near Hyderabad.
- Focus: Social structure, kinship, family, caste, and leadership in rural society.
- Approach:
- Combined structural-functional and developmental perspectives.
- Emphasized cultural integration and social change under modernization.
- Distinctiveness: Dube stressed on interdependence among caste, family, and religion, and examined impact of planned development on rural institutions.
He viewed the village as a microcosm of Indian civilization—an integrated but changing unit.
2. André Béteille
- Work: Caste, Class and Power: Changing Patterns of Stratification in a Tanjore Village (1965).
- Focus: Interrelationship between traditional caste hierarchy and emerging class-based inequalities.
- Approach:
- Used Marxian and Weberian perspectives to study stratification and mobility.
- Analyzed the transition from caste-based to class-based stratification due to land reforms and economic change.
Distinctiveness: Béteille shifted attention from ritual hierarchy to material and power dimensions, thus bridging sociology and political economy.
3. A. R. Desai
- Work: Peasant Struggles in India (1979), Rural Sociology in India (1959).
- Focus: Explored the impact of colonialism, capitalism, and class conflict on rural India.
- Approach:
- Adopted a Marxist framework, viewing the village through the lens of class relations, exploitation, and agrarian transformation.
- Studied agrarian class structure rather than caste hierarchy.
Distinctiveness: Desai’s approach was macro-structural and historical-materialist, unlike Srinivas’ or Dube’s micro-structural analyses.
He highlighted how colonial policies created new classes (zamindars, moneylenders) and intensified rural inequality.
4. D. N. Dhanagare
- Work: Peasant Movements in India (1983).
- Focus: Dynamics of agrarian movements and peasant protests as responses to economic exploitation.
- Approach: Combined Marxist and empirical traditions to analyze rural resistance and social change.
He viewed the village not merely as a harmonious unit but as a site of conflict and transformation.
5. Louis Dumont & David Pocock
- Work: Village India (1957) – a collection of essays analyzing the village as a unit of Indian civilization.
- Approach: Structuralist and Indological, emphasizing hierarchy and purity–pollution as organizing principles of village life.
Distinctiveness: Their approach contrasted with Srinivas’ process-oriented view by focusing on ideological structure rather than change.
Comparison of Approaches
| Sociologist | Main Focus | Approach | Distinctive Feature |
|---|---|---|---|
| M. N. Srinivas | Caste, Dominant Caste, Sanskritization | Structural-Functional, Processual | Focused on social mobility and change through caste dynamics |
| S. C. Dube | Social structure, culture, development | Functional & Cultural | Village as integrated microcosm; effect of modernization |
| André Béteille | Caste-class-power nexus | Weberian & Marxian | Introduced class analysis within caste framework |
| A. R. Desai | Agrarian structure, exploitation | Marxist | Village as a site of class conflict and colonial transformation |
| D. N. Dhanagare | Peasant movements | Marxist-Empirical | Emphasized resistance and protest |
| Louis Dumont | Hierarchy and values | Structuralist–Indological | Village as an embodiment of Indian civilization’s value system |
Sociological Significance of Village Studies
- Provided empirical grounding to Indian sociology.
- Highlighted the interaction between tradition and modernity.
- Revealed the regional variations in caste and class dynamics.
- Helped policymakers understand rural development and social change.
- Shifted focus from textual (book-view) to empirical (field-view) understanding of Indian society.
Conclusion
Village studies, pioneered by M. N. Srinivas, represent a crucial phase in the evolution of Indian sociology. While early studies like those of Srinivas and Dube emphasized integration and continuity, later scholars like Béteille and Desai highlighted inequality, power, and conflict.
Together, they transformed our understanding of rural India—from a static, harmonious community to a complex, changing social system influenced by caste, class, and state policies.
As Srinivas aptly remarked, “The Indian village is not a relic of the past, but a mirror reflecting the broader processes of change in Indian society.”