Main PDF
Main PDF
Main PDF
SEMESTER II
SOCIOLOGY
BLOCK : 1
Editorial Team
Content : Dr. Sambit Mallick, IIT, Guwahati
March, 2019
ISBN: 978-93-87940-80-2
This Self Learning Material (SLM) of the Krishna Kanta Handiqui State University is
made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike4.0 License
(International): http.//creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0.
Printed and published by Registrar on behalf of the Krishna Kanta Handiqui State Open University.
The University acknowledges with thanks the financial support provided by the
Distance Education Bureau, UGC, for the preparation of this study material.
Origin and Development of Rural Sociology, Nature and Scope of Rural Sociology,
Characteristics and Importance of Rural Sociology
The course ‘Rural and Urban Sociology’ introduces two specialised fields of Sociology, namely,
Rural Sociology and Urban Sociology. It intends to familiarize the learners with some of the basic concepts
in Rural and Urban Sociology. Its objective its to make the learners understand about the life and human
interaction in Rural and Urban Areas.
The course comprises of 15 units and are divided iinto two blocks. The first block consists of the
first 7 units and the second block consists of the remaining 8 units. Unit 1- Unit 8 disucsses the different
facets of Rural Sociology while Unit 9-15 discusses about Urban sociology. Unit 1 describes the origin
of Rural sociology and also explains its nature, scope, characteristics and importance. Unit 2 discusses
about Rural and Urban Society in India. Unit 3 discusses the Rural Social Structure in India Unit 4
deliberates on the nature of Rural Power Structure Unit 5 explains the nature of Rural Economy Unit 6
discuses about the continuity and change in Caste, Class and Power in Rural India, Unit 7 deliberates
on issues and concerns of Peasant Movements in India . Unit 8 discusses the plans and programmes
for Rural development. Unit 9 gives an introduction to urban sociology Unit 10 tries to discuss the
important theories of Urban Sociology Unit 11 explains about the growth of cities Unit 12 critically discusses
the different issues and problems of Urban society Unit 13 explains the objective and importance of
Town Planning Unit 14 discusses about Urban Governance and Collective action where role of various
stakeholders are deliberated upon Unit 15 discusses urbanization in the context of Northeast India.
After going through the entire course, the learner shall get a detailed overview of rual and urban
society in Inida, the different social institutions in these societies and their changing trends, concepts
and theoretical frameworks to understand these societies and also about the contemprary issues in
these societies.
This is the first block of the paper titled ‘Rural and Urban Sociology’ of M.A Sociology 2nd Semester
programme of Krishna Kanta Handiqui State Open University. This block intends to provide the learners
a basic understanding regarding one of the specialised fields of Sociology i.e Rural Sociology. After
reading this block the learners will be able to understand the different aspects of Rural society in India.
Unit 1 will explain the learners about the origin and development of Rural Sociology in Inida. The learners
will also get to know about nature, scope, characteristics and also the importance of Rural Sociology.
Unit 2 shall discuss the different concepts like Little Community, Peasant Society, Folk-Urban Continuum
etc. Unit 3 shall discuss the rural social structure in which the major social institutions like caste and
family shall be discussed th the context of Rural society. Unit 4 shall deal with the various aspects of
Rural power and Rural leadeship Unit 5 shall discuss the nature of Rural economy; its occupational
structure, land ownership pattern, as well as the systems of zamindari and feudalism in Indian society.
Unit 6 not only explains the changes that have occured in caste, class and power in Rural India but also
the aspects of caste, class and power that have continued. Unit 7 discusses the different peasant
movements in colonial and post-colonial India and the role of state in Rural Transformation
While going through the units of the block, you will find that unit is further divided into certain
sections and sub-sections, wherever necessary, for your better understanding. Again, the units carry
certain activities after a particular section where needed. These “ACTIVITIES” will provide you the
opportunity to practically apply your own thoughts based on the knowledge gained from reading the text
in a particular section. Besides, in order to give you additional information on certain relevant topics, you
will find a category called “LET US KNOW” after the sections in each unit. Another category that has
been included at the end of each section of a particular unit is “CHECK YOUR PROGRESS”. The
purpose of this category is to help you to asses for yourself as to how thoroughly you have understood a
particular section. You may then match your answers with “ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR PROGRESS”
given at the end of each unit. The section “FURTHER READING” in each unit contains the names of a
few books which you might want to consult if you are intereted in learning more elaborately about the
concepts discussed in a particular unit. Furthermore, the category called “POSSIBLE QUESTIONS” is
intended to give you a hint of the type of questions you are likely to get in the examination.
1.2 INTRODUCTION
In this unit, we shall learn about the origin and development of Rural
Sociology. Further we shall be able to understand its nature and scope and
also about its characteristics and importance. This unit shall therefore give
us a detailed overview of what Rural Sociology is. Let us first begin with the
birth of Rural sociology, which is elaborated in the next section.
It was only after World War II that Rural Sociology extended beyond
the boundaries of United States of America and entered into Europe
(especially in France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and United Kingdom)
and Asia. In India, the discipline developed through the studies and reports
brought out by administrators, economists, sociologists and anthropologists
since the colonial period. Mahatma Gandhi said India lived in its villages
recounted again by Census of 2011 which estimates 833 million people
continue to live in rural India. He believed that if villages prosper the country
will prosper. For a village to prosper one needs to understand the village
life, how people in villages live, the reasons of their poverty and
backwardness, their problems and after getting a holistic understanding of
rural people, their problems and their places one can chalk out the plan for
its development. This project for development of villages took the shape of
village studies carried out by administrators, economists, sociologists and
anthropologists in India, which is briefly discussed below.
their hold over the economy of the country. Prior to World War I, the
Asian countries were conscious about Asiatic Mode of Production
popularised by the writings of Karl Marx who is credited with bringing
Indian Village Community into the circle of world history. Marx believed
that Indian Village Community can be liberated through economic
autarky and political autonomy. The writings of Marx made intellectuals
of the country aware about the apathy of the Indian peasants. Mass
movement led by Mahatma Gandhi was essentially based on the rural
question to get over poverty and misery of rural poor by boycotting
purchase and sell of foreign goods. Gandhi's programmes of rural
reconstruction involved revival of small-scale village industries and
handloom, panchayati raj at the village level and removal of
untouchability.Gandhi's effort to address the rural questionwas attuned
with several studies carried out to understand the plight of the peasants
and come out with practical solutions. Pioneering work was done by
Gilbert Slater in 1916 under University of Madras to understand villages
in South India. He put forth that villages came before towns and the
economic life of a town or city cannot be understood without reference
to the lands, which sends its food and raw materials and the villages
from which it attracts young men and women. The villages were again
resurveyed in 1936 and 1961. The Punjab Board of Economic Enquiry
was set up which carried studies on villages affected by famine since
1920s. In 1935, the Bengal Board of Economic Enquiry was set up and
it undertook survey of villages in Bengal primarily to understand how
the famine in rural areas of Bengal had affected the rural/national
economy. Tagore's ViswaBharati had organized village surveys around
Shantiniketan and set up a Rural Reconstruction Board to understand
the adversity of the peasants. Similar studies were carried out by Scottish
Church College in Calcutta under the guidance of T.K.Sankara Menon,
by Gujarat Vidyapeeth under the guidance of J.C.Kumarappa and by
Ghokale Institute of Politics and Economics in Pune, which published
accounts of villages in Maharashtra. Most of these studies focussed on
the social and economic life of the rural people in isolated villages. By
1940s a new trend was introduced to survey villages which focussed
on specific aspects of rural problem in certain rural areaa. In 1946,
Indian Statistical Institute in Calcutta undertook a series of sample
surveys of villages in West Bengal to study the effects of famine on
rural society.The studies focussed on the economic status of the village
people, the poor status of agriculture due to recurrent famines, drought
and indebtedness.
In the previous section, we have learnt about the origin and development
of Rural Sociology. In this section, let us try to understand its nature and
scope.
time and space. In spite of the above mentioned problems, Rural Sociology
can be called a social science as it comprises certain elements of natural
science as well as humanities.
By now, we have been able to get an idea about what is Rural sociology,
how it emerged as a separate sub-discipline of sociology, what does it
study, what is its scope so on and so forth. Let us now try to understand its
characteristics and importance.
.....................................................................................................
l It was only after World War II that Rural Sociology extended beyond
the boundaries of United States of America and entered into Europe
(especially in France, Germany, Italy, Netherlands and United Kingdom)
and Asia.
l In India, the discipline developed through the studies and reports brought
out by administrators, economists, sociologists and anthropologists since
the colonial period.
** ** **
2.2 INTRODUCTION
than family and community. Peasants marry for work and zeal of life. Women
are respected as they produce children who could contribute to labour in
the fields. The form of residence in a peasant society is basicallypatrilocal
and the descent is along male line. Unlike Little Communities, Peasant
Societies are not isolated or self-sufficient and have developed economic,
political, social and cultural relations withlarger societal and cultural wholes
of which it is a part.Peasants are distinct from primitive people as they
have come in contact with wider society. Peasant Societies are
interdependent on each other through trade, pilgrimage to shrines,
performance of governmental duties (like paying taxes or respecting the
political leader/priest), education, medical facilities, lineage ties, kinship
and exogamous form of marriages,which continue from generation to
generation.These inter-connections between peasant societies are what
Oscar Lewis refers to as 'Rural Cosmopolitanism'. However, the social
behaviour resembles more the folk societies than the urban societies.Yet it
has certain features of urban societies like the emergence of elite class
(the literati, the carriers of classical written tradition) who exploit and exercise
control over large number of subservient people due totheir monopoly of
power and authority.
modern urban society but something in between. This led him to develop
the concept ofFolk-Urban Continuum as a lens to understand how cultural
change gradually takes place due to cultural contact leading to the process
of change from folk society to urban society or from societies of the past to
societies of contemporary era. Folk-Urban Continuum is usedas a heuristic
concept to compare communities, which can be placed on a scale
representing a range of traits with folk society and urban society being
placed on two extreme ends of the scale. Folk-Urban Continuum would
facilitate in building an ideal typology of societies, which ranged from folk
society to urban society. Redfield believed that rather than viewing folk
society as having a dichotomous relation with urban society, it should be
viewed to be in a continuum where gradual changes in folk society lead to
transition to urban society. Today, as there is a blurring of lines to understand
where the city ends and where the rural begins, it is very useful to employ
Folk-Urban Continuum as an ideal type to build a typology of communities
or societies on the basis of their contact with urban society and folk society
and as the polar opposites on the continuum. Generally, the villages more
in contact with urban societyare more urbanized than those villages with
minimal contacts.
McKim Marriot's take on great and little tradition has been criticized by
Stanley JeyarajaTambiah as ahistorical remnant of anthropological
investigation as the Great Hindu Tradition consists of several texts written
in different periods yet they were presented as if they were one synchronic
whole. ButTambiah's views cannot be applicable to the Great Tradition of
European Christianity as the principal sacred texts are common across all
denominations. Louis Dumont and David Pocock had criticized Marriot's
differences between the two traditions saying that the two traditions are not
separated but lived as one by rural people. Analytically it may be useful to
view the two traditions as an integrated whole. However, in reality rural
peoplethemselves recognise the existence of anothermore exalted tradition.
Thus, Mckim Marriot's study did contribute to the understanding that Indian
villages cannot be considered as isolates and villages are interconnected
with towns and cities leading to inter-exchange of culture, tradition and
ways of life which could be understood through Folk-Urban Continuum.
very little about the actual nature of social organizations and relationships.
Moreover, it does not reveal about the continuous changes that are taking
place in urban societies or the processes that are involved in these changes.
As seen from Mckim Marriot's discussion of KishanGarhi continuities and
discontinuities are seen side by side when understanding Indian village
communities. Continuities can be seen in religious practices, lineage, kinship
and affinal ties. Discontinuities can be viewed in changing occupational
structure, caste mobility, rural power structure, emergence of rural classes
and rural elites. The continuities and changes in rural society in India will
be discussed in detail in Unit 6. In spite of above mentioned criticisms,
Redfield's theoretical and methodological understanding of folk-urban
continuum has been employed in several village studies and it has helped
to understand how folk and peasant societiesin India are dimensions of
Indian civilizations. Robert Redfield's work on Little Community, Peasant
Society, Urban Society and Folk-Urban Continuum reflects the changing
subject matter in anthropology and sociology and the quest for
understanding different types of societies so as to unravel the laws of its
development, structure, function and change/continuity.
l Redfield believed that as peasant society is part society and part culture,
the culture of peasant society is a dimension of civilization of which it is
a part. The informal, illiterate tradition/culture of peasant society is what
l When the great tradition undergoes change at local or village level and
the great tradition loses much of its original form in the process it is
known as Parochialization.
** ** **
3.2 INTRODUCTION
rapidly in the past seven decades and since acquiring new significanceafter
the birth of a new nation. Policy makers have realized that if the nation
needs to develop it needs to focus attention on rural development. By
understanding rural society in India one can understand as Robert Redfield
would say a true classic Indian civilization and rapidly changing rural
society.Rural society in India varies in terms of size of population,
composition of the village whether single caste or multi-caste villages,
economic status whether affluent villages or poor backward villages, types
of farming whether subsistence farming or commercial farming, contact
with urban areas whether close connection with urban areas or situated in
remote areas and so on. Inspite of the variations in Indian rural society
there are certain features which are common to each village like:
l Villages have well defined social, political, religious and economic ties
with other villages.
l Villages generally have stable population with shared history and values.
l They are united in times of need and crisis. They share a strong 'we-
feeling' and sense of belonging to their community.
l Land is revered and valued in rural society. They produce primarily for
consumption and the surplus are sold in markets to purchase goods
they do not produce.
l Every village has its own organizational body, which has authority to
give sanctions to the guilty/law breakers. Panchayats are the political
and administrative unit of the villages resolving disputes within the
village.
These are some of the common features cutting across villages in India.
In the previous unit, you were introduced to the concept of Folk-Urban
Continuum. But there are certain differences which demarcates rural society
from urban society. One can distinguish rural society from urban society on
the basis of classification adopted by the Census like size of population,
density and primary occupation. In this unit, we shall try to understand the
approaches to study rural society, and discuss about two important social
institutions i.e caste and family in the context of Indian Rural Society.
Rural Society has been studied using varied approaches and techniques
to understand various dimensions of rural ways of life. Following are two of
the approaches applied by scholars to understand rural society in India.
could be used to understand rural society in India. Village is the unit of rural
society and a historical category as it has emerged at a certain point in
history. Further one can trace its growth and development over subsequent
periods of history, the structural changes it has undergone due to
orthogenetic or heterogenetic changes or the rapid transformation which
has occurred due to industrial revolution.Data on rural society is collected
from written, oral and documented historical archival records and artefacts.
such villages there are no streets as houses are not aligned alongside
the streets. There are only narrow alleys which connects one hut to
another and to the huts in neighbouring village. Such kind of villages
can be found in Satpura ranges in Maharashtra.
Ø Shapeless Cluster: The villages have irregular roads which are formed
according to requirement and convenience of the village people. The
clusters have marked boundaries enclosed within stone walls or wooden
palisade for the purpose of defence. As population increases it may
grow to form a linear cluster with parallel roads set at right angle with
the existing roads and eventually may even turn into a square cluster.
Such kinds of villages are found in Gangetic plains, Rajasthan, Malwa
Plateau and parts of Maharashtra.
Ø Linear Cluster: These types of villages are formed along linear roads
with open spaces and houses are formed alongside the road in a parallel
fashion. Such kinds of villages can be found in coastal districts of Odisa
and Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat and South of Rajasthan.
particular parts of the body associated with these divisions and the order in
which they are mentioned determine their status in society. The first three
castes are 'twice-born' (dwija) on the account of the donning of the sacred
thread in the ritual ceremony of upanayana. In this varna model there is no
place for untouchables. However there are references in Vedic literature to
groups such as the Ayogava, Chandala, Nishada and Paulkasawho were
despised.
Caste has a strong hold in rural society than in urban society. Caste
determines the functions, occupation, status, available opportunities and
sometimes even handicaps the individual. As caste largely ascertains the
ideals and ways of life of rural social groups, it also shapes the value system
and worldviews prevailing in the rural society. Some of the characteristics
of castes are as follows:
work and farm activities but their contribution to family labour was often
neglected. Due to feminist work on rural women, education, spread of
awareness regarding women empowerment their contribution to family
labour is visible and they are recognized as homemakers rather than
housewives.
l Changes in authority structure: All these factors had not only changed
the composition of the rural family but also changed the authority
structure of the rural family. Earlier the male head of the family enjoyed
absolute authority over the members of the family and the family affairs.
Today due to the changes in the composition and authority structure of
the rural family the importance of head of the family has declined.
l Rural Society in India has been studied using historical and ecological
approaches.
** ** **
4.2 INTRODUCTION
Prior to British Rule in India, land was communally owned. During the
British rule, land was converted to private property through Permanent Land
Settlementwhich superseded traditional right of village community over land.
The Permanent Land Settlementwas a form of land revenue system
thatcreated two forms of ownership over land-landlordism and individual
proprietors. There were various kinds of land revenue systems created
during the British rule in India which are discussed below-
scenario through Panchayati Raj and accepted the new situation. After
abolition of zamindari and jagirdari system, a new system that evolved was
KhatedariSystem, which gave ownership of and right to land. The Khatedari
System led to their economic prosperity as they mobilised their caste
members (which were numerically preponderant in their villages) during
the time of electionsto cast vote in favour of their caste member(s). The ex-
zamindars and jagirdars' economic prosperity and their numerical
preponderance in the villages aroused their political consciousness to aspire
for positions of power and prestige. Studies conducted by K.L.Sharma,
T.K.Oommen show that a section of landowners held formal positions of
power in the Panchayati Raj and manipulated the benefits in their own
interests, and in the interests of their kins, relatives and friends. The exercise
of political power through Panchayat has become a decisive factor in
becoming dominant in the rural society.
the hands of traditional rural elites. He said that in most of the cases the
power reservoirs control the resources of the rural society;have contacts
with influential political leaders and administrators to whom they extend
their support and co-operation and expect the same from them, have
accumulated wealth and property; and oblige their kins, relatives and friends
to form a support structure in the rural society. The power exercisers who
are pseudo power elites, to retain their official position obliges to the power
reservoirs by granting loans, benefits and resources.
Studies conducted by F.G. Bailey in Orissa show that some of the ex-
tenants belonging to peasant classes after independence have become
politically influential. But this is not true for majority of the peasant classes
as they continue to languish in poverty and strive to make their ends meet.
Thus from the above discussion it could be inferred that political power as
in the past is not tied to ownership of majority of lands and property. New
bases of power have emerged which are not essentially based on caste or
class. Rural power is not primarily based on ascription like caste, hereditary
ownership of land and property but could now be achieved through individual
potentialities, networking, traits, personality and qualities. It has been
observed that rural leaders came from different castes, classes, may or
may not have ownership of land and property but had access to rural power.
individuals (families) and not the castes.He stated that there are dominant
individuals and not dominant castes in a rural society. Dominant individuals
exercise dominance within or without caste or within and outside caste
simultaneously due to one's personality, skills, qualities and affiliation with
political party to attain specified goals. The status of the dominant individual
is secular, relative and based on his/her progress and wellbeing (including
his/her family) and not based on the caste or group he/she belongs to.
T.K.Oommen states that the context of dominance and the resources
available to an individual are important factors of rural leadership. The rural
leaders are product of developments of post-colonial India like adult-
franchise, Panchayati Raj,education, abolition of Zamindari and Jagirdari
systems, affiliation with political party, means of communication and
transportation.
Thus, from the above discussion, it can be seen that the traditional
rural power structure based on caste, numerical strength and landownership
is changing. It has led to the emergence of new democratic open power
structures where the traditional factors of power like caste, numerical
strength and landownership interplays with other factors like education,
access to political parties, means of transportation and communication.
Thus it can be seen that rural power structure varies according to time and
place combining a number of factors which leads to the creation of a new
rural power structure.
Q 1: Define power.
.....................................................................................................
Q 2: Who gave the concept of Dominant Caste?
.....................................................................................................
Q 3: Who introduced the Ryotwari System in colonial India?
.....................................................................................................
l The hierarchy of the castes was congruent with social, ritual, economic
and political power. The dominators not only had social, political,
economic and ritual power but also exercised their power in such a way
that it perpetuated the subordination of the low castes who could not
own land.
1) Doshi, S.L.& Jain, P.C. (1999). Rural Sociology. New Delhi: Rawat
Publications.
Ans to Q No 1:Power is defined as the ability to exert one's will over others.
** ** **
5.2 INTRODUCTION
The previous units have set the stage for a broader understanding of
the rural societies in India by providing a discussion on the significance of
studying these societies, their major features as well as some of the changes
that these societies are experiencing with the development of urban centers.
Rural Sociology as a specialised branch of Sociology concentrates on
62 Rural and Urban Sociology
intend to deal with several of these aspects which are related to land, land
tenure, agrarian stratification, green revolution, etc. We are convinced that
without studying the agrarian social structure, it is almost very difficult for
us to develop any insight in India’s rural society. There is yet another reason
for laying emphasis on land studies. A general observation in the realm of
land reforms would immediately show that all over the country the agitations
related to land demand for reforms pertaining to land, water and forests. It
amply shows that the village people can hardly afford to wait any further for
the solution of land tenure and land relations. The study of agrarian systems
will centre round the problem of land and its utilisation for productive
purposes. According to Andre Beteille, the land problems in India and the
study of agrarian social structure revolve round two major issues such as:
l social arrangements
that private owners possess the right to alienate land owned by them.
But this kind of absolute ownership was exercised by religious grantees
only. The case was different with others. These landlords were closely
watched by the village officers of the king. This land was liable to
confiscation for improper use or partial use. Though land transfer was
theoretically possible, the following constraints were present on the right
to transfer:
From the Vedic times, India has a stratified social structure. The village
evolved as a self-sufficient unit of the society based on the caste system. It
developed its own support system. The complementary relationship between
the groups of dominant peasant castes on one hand and artisans and
peasant classes on the other was the special characteristic of the Indian
rural economy. In essence, this often quoted relationship centered round
the production and distribution by the hereditary occupational castes. The
non-agricultural castes were compensated by traditionally fixed shares of
village produce and in some cases by small plots of land. But these castes
always retain some measures of freedom to sell their goods and services
to earn extra income. The payment made by the villagers was meant to
assure them of their minimal subsistence.
The village structure was quite organised. All lands belonged to the
village community. The king exercised minimal influence. At times, since
the village was inhabited by tribes, village authority was akin to tribal
authority. The land distribution was not completely static. Migrations and
demographic changes brought about alterations in the distribution pattern
Rural and Urban Sociology 69
of the village land. Village organisation became the centre of power after
the Gupta period when central authority was comparatively weak and
emerged as ‘nuclear areas of cooperative institutions’. Thus, the
decentralisation of authority and emerging role of the village organisations
started during the Gupta period. These village organisations were
considered as the embryo form of future feudal structure. The king or his
intermediary claimed a part of the produce of the land. The revenue was
collected from village individuals and deposited in a common pool. Some
common expenses of the village were made out of the pool. The share of
the overlord was given by the village committee (consisted of the
representatives of the villagers). Thus, land as a thing of value was regarded
as being part of an aggregate wealth of the community rather than belonging
to a single person. But the system was not free from exploitation and class
differentiation. The contribution to the pool differed among different people.
The headman enjoyed some revenue free allotments. The person controlling
the pool and the class favoured by the dominant group paid lower rates of
revenue. To compensate, the lower strata of peasants had to pay more.
Growth and hierarchical structure and evolution of the positions of the
intermediaries landed estates were considered as feudalistic features by
some. While some others have refuted them. But whether the trend indicates
feudalisation or not, it created considerable change of land relations, politics
and culture and the major characteristics of that change was
decentralisation.
enabling them to retain their status and pass on to their sons. When
zamindari rights became alienable, the land belonging to the zamindar
was divided among his sons, on his death. This way, during this period,
zamindari rights were established and with the passage of time the
zamindari rights were scattered through inheritance. As a result, two
types of landowners emerged.
Each lineage was divided into the more powerful branch which held the
fort and other less powerful branch who held lesser village privileges. The
former were termed as intermediary or secondary zamindars who might
collect revenue from their less affluent kinsmen (who were known as the
village or primary zamindars). These primary zamindars were also
sometimes known as ‘pattidars’. The intermediary zamindar’s rights solely
extended to the land revenue collection at a superior level. The primary
zamindars were the landholders having intermediary proprietary dominion
over the soil including a restricted power of mortgage and alienation as
well as the rights to locate cultivators, control the waste, sinks, wells and
plant groves. They were generally found to be settled as dominant lineages
in a number of contiguous villages. The important aspect was not only the
territorial extent but also the depth of penetration of the lineage groups
over the agricultural community. The small landowners ceded their rights
to the large landowners and became their dependents, on condition that
they retain the hereditary use of the land. The continuous extension of land
made it impossible for the large landowners to collect revenue without the
help of others. Thus, sub-infeudation evolved creating differentiation in land
control rights over land under direct or indirect supervision. The land
cultivated directly by the zamindars was termed as ‘Shiror Khas’ land to
distinguish it from land which was allotted to sub-intermediaries for
cultivation. From this allotted land, zamindars used to take a portion of the
produce as a due for his overlordship.
The supreme overlordship of land rested upon the ruler. Variety in land
relations originated from the revenue extraction. Land close to capital was
kept under the direct control of the ruler. Hence these Khas lands had
wage tenancy. But land extending to the furthest corner of the kingdom
was difficult to control directly and representatives were appointed, thus
giving rise to three-tier relationships in land. Revenue rates were also not
uniform. Of course varying revenue rates accounted for various types of
land. Mughal tax was not proper rent or even land tax on the crops. Though
the system reduced expenses of collection and vexation of revenue
collecting authorities, it kept the peasants ignorant about the tax that they
had to pay. To reduce the chance of exploitation of the peasantry, annual
assessment was made on the basis of area statistics. Measures were
adopted to curb the power of the intermediaries by keeping their possession
of land as temporary by transferring them yearly, or every two or three
years. Also, there was a provision of award of promotion or demotion by
changing the size of their territory on the basis of their performance. To
prevent the intermediary from charging more than the authorised taxes- a
copy of the revenue paper was kept with the permanent local official. But
the short term arrangement only enhanced the desire for maximum
72 Rural and Urban Sociology
LET US KNOW
The Agrarian structure has changed enormously over time, from the
Colonial to the Post-Colonial Periods. When the British colonised India,
they saw land as a major source of revenue extraction. They even
encouraged more clearance of jungles to facilitate agrarian expansion and
for that matter more revenue earnings. The British Government created
private property in India in the form of ryotwari and zamindari. In the ryotwari
area, it introduced the system under which the peasant producer had to
pay to the state increasing land tax in cash instead of in kind. The land tax
grew progressively heavy resulting into the increasing indebtedness of the
agriculturists. In the zamindari area, the burden of increasing rent imposed
on the tenant producer by the zamindar impoverished the tenant and saddled
him also with the ever-increasing burden of debt. Thus, the British introduced
different land tenure systems in the Indian society in order to procure
maximum revenue. It is the land which constitutes the major source of
livelihood for the village people. But all the peasants who live in villages do
not own their individual land. Many of them purchase rights of cultivation
and occupancy from others. In return, from hired rights in land, these people
pay the landlords or their intermediaries a fixed share of the produce. They
are called peasants. In fact, the emergence of peasants goes back to the
British Period when in 1793 the Permanent Land Settlement was made.
The zamindari system which emerged from land settlement was an
intermediary system. The system created the class of tenants who suffered
from operation at the hands of the zamindars. It was a historical emergence
found for the first time in Indian agrarian history. In the princely states, the
jagirdar worked as an intermediary between the tenant and the central
princely rule. In these states, jagirdar was the counterpart of zamindar. The
status of the tenant in pre-independent India was highly deplorable. Many
districts of Colonial India were administered through the zamindari system.
The British also granted property rights to the zamindars. They were given
more control over land than they had before. Since, the British also imposed
heavy land revenue (taxes) on agriculture, the zamindars extracted as much
produce or money as they could out of the cultivators. One result of this
zamindari system was that agricultural production stagnated or declined
during much of the period of British rule.
74 Rural and Urban Sociology
Ø Paying cash rent tenants: They pay part of their rent in cash.
Ø Paying fixed product tenants: They pay a fixed share of the crops or
kind to the landlords.
The British period realised that land was the key factor in the process
of Indian economic development and they must control land in order to
stabilise their rule over the continent. But they found the prevailing system
quite perplexing. They changed the entire system of ownership. Their first
step was to fix the legal owner of the land. In 1769, the company divided
parganas into 15 lots each and auctioned them with revenue to be paid to
the company. The auctioned sales placed the ownership of land beyond
the reach of the poor persons attached to the soil and created a new
aristocracy who were originally moneylenders or traders. The new owners
squeezed the peasants to pay the speculative land revenue. Famines, land
abandon and decline in revenue made the government understand the
failure of the scheme, but they attributed the failure of the scheme to the
short period of the land settlement. The government expected that
lengthening of the period of the lease would create an incentive to invest
and make the landlords innovative. But the extension of the period did not
bring the desired change. Land revenue increased four-fold. The zamindars
were so heavily taxed that they kept themselves busy in shifting the burden
to the ryots. The dispossession of zamindars due to non-payment continued.
The British East India Company, superimposing the 18th century concept
of private property on a very different indigenous land system, assumed
that the ‘revenue farmers’ in fact owned the land even though they neither
worked in it nor invested in it. Ignoring any rights of the actual tillers, the
permanent settlement of Bengal 1793 gave the zamindars the rights to fix
their terms with the cultivators in return for fixed land revenue from the
zamindars to the state. By this single piece of legislation, the actual tillers
of the soil became the tenants, while a class of revenue farmers became
de facto owners of the land but they did not cultivate. An exorbitant increase
in revenue demand weakened the position of the zamindars. As a result
the whole agrarian sector was in a decaying condition.
Ø Land Reforms Under Plans: The land reform policy was concretised
for the first time under the First Five Year Plan (1951-56). Agrarian
classes were classified into: intermediaries, large owners, small and
medium owners, tenants at will and landless workers (Government of
India 1951). Special emphasis was given on abolition of intermediaries,
enactment of radical tenancy law and resumption of cultivation based
on peasant proprietorship. The need for providing a ceiling and lower
limit to agricultural land was recommended. Confirmation of ownership
rights and starting a redistributive process by imposition of ceiling were
two broad areas of reform effects undertaken under the second plan.
The First Plan while introducing ceiling provided for the rights of
resumption up to the limit for personal cultivation. But experiences
showed that provisions of resumption actually resulted in ejection of
tenancy. Hence conditions of resumptions were properly specified under
the second plan to plug loopholes. Special attention was given to the
ownership issue of the small farmers. To enable the small farmers to
resume personal cultivation the time constraint was removed in their
case. Considering the fact that the medium sized owners could transfer
a part of their land in another name to enlist themselves as small holders-
all land transferees were debarred from being considered as small
farmers.
The Third Plan reiterated the policy accepted by the previous two plans
and emphasised the necessity of quick completion of land reforms
programmes as the foundation for agricultural growth. The Fourth Five Year
Plan reviewed the existing land reform measures and acknowledged the
gaps between the set objectives and actual legislation. Implementation of
prescribed laws was considered ineffective and inadequate.
Thus, the study of the rural sociology, in fact, is the study of agrarian
social system. The social and cultural life of a village is largely determined
by the relations of people to the land. It is in this context, we have discussed
the agrarian system prevalent in our country. In doing so we have examined
the system of land ownership patterns in different epochs in history. In a
rural society, land is the prime productive asset which determines the
income, employment, status and authority of a person. In any discussion of
rural sociology land tenure system and land reforms constitute an important
part of the study. In the next section we shall discuss the system of zamindari
and feudalism in detail.
The land ownership pattern developed during the colonial period brought
about a significant shift in the indigenous system of land ownership and
control. The Asiatic mode of production that prevailed in India before the
advent of colonial conquest was destroyed by the British rule. They
reconstructed Indian society in such a way that it serves the colonial
subjugation and plunder. With the introduction of railways, the British sowed
the seeds of capitalist expansion in India. At the same time in agrarian
sector, which had no right of property in land, they imposed zamindari and
ryotwari land tenure systems as already discussed in the previous section.
In both the systems land was considered as private property and commodity
and was placed in the hands of landlords. Land became a major source of
revenue for the colonial administration. These intermediaries were
introduced to extract maximum tax on land. This had resulted in exploitation
of the indigenous cultivators and thus added extreme poverty to their
conditions of living. Thus the Indian feudal system was created and nurtured
by the colonial power and acted as a means to drain off wealth.
When we look into the feudalism in India, we are aware that it differs
from European feudalism in many respects. Landlord-peasant relationship
is the core of the matter and the exploitation of the estate by its owner,
controller, enjoyer or beneficiary as its essential ingredient. With these
minimum universals, feudalism may have several variations. The
peculiarities of the system in some western European countries do not
apply to the various types of feudalism found in other areas. Therefore, it is
pertinent to understand the difference between feudalism in Indian society
and the one which developed in Europe.
Ø The first legislation was the abolition of the zamindari system (that is,
the abolition of different intermediaries). The major motive behind this
legislation was to wipe out exploitation of the cultivators at the hand of
these intermediaries. However, zamindari abolition did not wipe out
landlordism or the tenancy or sharecropping systems, which continued
in many areas.
Ø Secondly, another major land reform laws that were introduced were
the tenancy abolition and regulation acts. These attempted to prohibit
tenancy or to regulate rents in order to give security to the tenants.
Ø The third major category of land reforms was the Land Ceiling Act.
These laws imposed an upper limit on the amount of land that can be
owned by a particular family. Accordingly, the state is supposed to identify
and take possession of surplus land (above the ceiling limit) held by
each family and redistribute it to landless families.
changes where it took place. It had been first used during the late 1960s to
refer to the effects of the introduction of high yielding varieties (HYV) seeds
of wheat and rice in developing countries. However, the green revolution
was not just about the use of HYV seed. It was a package. The new varieties
of seeds required a fertility-enhancing inputs, that is chemical fertilizers,
controlled irrigation conditions, and plant-protecting chemicals (pesticides).
The other components of the package consisted of providing cheap
institutional credit, price incentives, and marketing facilities. In order to back
up the application of new technology on local farms, a large number of
agricultural universities were also opened in the regions selected for the
new programme. It as under the direct supervision of the Ford Foundation
that the Intensive Agricultural Development Programme (IADP) was started
in 1961.
It should also be noted that rising prices and a shift in the mode of
payment of agricultural workers from payment in kind (grains) to cash,
actually worsened the economic conditions of most rural workers. A
comparison of the wage rates of a pre-green revolution year with those of a
year after the new technology had been adopted showed that while cash
wages of agricultural labourers had gone up after the introduction of the
new technology, their purchasing power had in fact come down due to
overall increase in prices.
the other hand, another set of scholars, on the basis of their own empirical
studies mostly from eastern India, asserted that Indian agriculture was still
dominated by a semi-feudal mode of production. In some of these areas,
landlords-cum-moneylenders continued to dominate the process of
agricultural production. Peasants and labourers were tied to them through
mechanism of debt that led to ‘forced commercialisation’ of labour and
agricultural yields. As a result, this produced a self-perpetuating stagnant
and exploitative agrarian structure that could be at best described as ‘semi-
feudal’.
Further, the policy of liberalisation that India has been following since
the late 1980s had a very significant impact on agriculture and rural society.
The policy entails participation in the World Trade Organisation (WTO),
which aims to bring about a more free international trading system and
requires the opening up of Indian markets to import. The Government has
embarked on the New Economic Policies (NEPs). The new economic
policies being implemented as part of globalisation strategy of imperialism
have brought vast changes in the agricultural and industrial sectors. These
policies have turned the agriculture into economically unviable activity for
the poor and middle farmers. Some of these measures are hiking the rates
of electricity, fertilizers and irrigation water. The effect of these set of policies
was immediately felt by the vast farmer masses. The deep rooted malaise
got expressed in the form of suicides by the farmers. The aim of this strategy
is to implement a set policy that turns the Indian agriculture into an
Ø removal of food subsidies for the small farmers has led to decrease in
the amount of food purchase from the public distribution system
ACTIVITY
1. Collect information from your state and write an essay on the use
of chemical fertilizers and pesticides in agriculture and their impacts
on the environment.
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
2. Look around your society and try to write a note on how the
processes of globalisation and liberalisation have penetrated into
the society.
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
.................................................................................................
l The rural people are also engaged in a variety of other activities, apart
from agriculture. A large numbers of weavers, potters, ironsmiths,
goldsmiths, carpenters are also found in the village economy. Different
occupations are traditionally linked to the caste system. However, the
caste system has experienced change with the elapse of time.
l The Colonial rulers imposed zamindari and ryotwari land tenure systems
in Indian society. These intermediaries were introduced to extract
maximum tax on land. This had resulted in exploitation of the indigenous
cultivators and thus added extreme poverty to their conditions of living.
Thus, the Indian feudal system was created and nurtured by the colonial
power and acted as a means to drain off wealth. In both the systems
land was considered as private property and commodity and was placed
in the hands of landlords. Land became a major source of revenue for
the colonial administration.
3) Doshi, S.L. and P.C Jain. 1999. Rural Sociology. Jaipur: Rawat
Publications.
6) Sharma, R.S. 1984. How Feudal was Indian Feudalism. Social Scientist.
Volume 2, Number 12. February. Pp. 16-41. (Accessed online http://
www.jstor.org)
(d) Feudalism
Q 4: What measures do you think the government must take to protect the
rights of the small and landless farmers?
** ** **
Rural and Urban Sociology 93
6.2 INTRODUCTION
Caste has a strong hold in rural society than in urban society. Caste
determines the functions, occupation, status, available opportunities and
sometimes even handicaps the individual. As caste largely ascertains the
ideals and ways of life of rural social groups, it also shapes the value system
and worldviews prevailing in the rural society. There are still many villages
in India which are isolated due to absence of road or the roads are so
primitive that during monsoons the inter-village communication and
transportation is cut off, far removed from basic urban facilities like means
of modern transport, recreation, electricity and institutions and values of
the West like equality, efficiency, punctuality, diligence and so on. Education
facilities provided by the government in most of the villages are absent or
non-functional. The standard of living has not qualitatively improved and
the government benefits are still cornered by upper castes. In spite of the
changes discussed there are some of essential are primarily structural
characteristics of caste which continue to remain. These are discussed
below:
structure. Thus, not only functional changes have taken place in the caste
system in rural India but there is alsostructural continuity in caste system in
rural India.
The process of maintaining and even elevating the status and position
of landlords to bourgeois through accumulation of wealth and surplus and
investment of their wealth and compensation they received (due to abolition
of intermediaries and conversation of princely states to states in Indian
republic) in big business like hotel, trade and transportation is known as
bourgeoisiefication. Another affect of abolition of intermediaries is the social
formation of the class of rural elites and upper classes. As discussed in
Unit 4 the ex-zamindars and jagirdars to avoid land ceiling and to avoid
passing of their landed property to landless people formed fake agricultural
co-operative societies and legally divided thousands of acres of lands among
their kins, relatives and friends. Even servants, acquaintances and hired
members were either made members of such societies or were given
landholding rights for namesake. In reality, the land was still controlled and
owned by ex-zamindars and jagirdars.
Inspite of the changes in the class structure of rural India there are
certain elements of continuity which remain which are discussed in the
following section.
The continuity, which one observes in the class structure of rural India, is
the polarization of the classes into haves and haves-not. The haves comprise
of classes, who belong mainly to upper castes and the creamy layer of
scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other backward classes, classes
who have cornered the benefits of rural development, whereas, the have-
nots comprise those classes, who are pauperized and oppressed by the
former classes to further their own interests and to accumulate surplus to
maintain their domination and subordination over the have-nots. Studies
conducted by Yogendra Singh, Myron Weiner and Kathleen Gough shows
that the power positions especially in Panchayati Raj and in Community
Development Programmes are taken up by the rich upper classes. Even
though power may pass to have-nots it comes back to the traditional power
elites. The abolition of intermediaries and land reforms did not lead to
formation of egalitarian society. Land was still owned and controlled by ex-
zamindars and jagirdars who to forgo land ceiling, had passed their landed
property to their kins, friends, loyal tenants and to ghost schools and temples
which existed only on papers.
l Structural Changes are those which have far reaching effects on caste
system like abolition of intermediaries, introduction of Panchayati Raj,
Community Development Programmes, Village Cooperatives, adult
franchise, reform movements, Gandhian movement against
untouchability, education, increase in standard of living and so on.
l Caste has a strong hold in rural society than in urban society. Caste
determines the functions, occupation, status and available opportunities
of an individual, and sometimes even handicaps the individual. As caste
largely ascertains the ideals and ways of life of rural social groups, it
also shapes the value system and worldviews prevailing in the rural
society. Castes are not weakening in the contemporary rural society in
India. Instead they have got a new lease of life.
l The process of maintaining and even elevating the status and position
of landlords to bourgeois through accumulation of wealth and surplus
and investment of their wealth and compensation they received (due to
abolition of intermediaries and conversation of princely states to states
in India republic) in big business like hotel, trade and transportation is
known as bourgeoisiefication.
l The continuity, which one observes in the class structure of rural India
is the polarization of the classes into haves and haves-not. The haves
comprise of classes who belong mainly to upper castes and the creamy
layer of scheduled castes, scheduled tribes and other backward classes
who have cornered the benefits of rural development whereas the have-
nots comprise those classes who are pauperized and oppressed by
the former classes to further their own interests and to accumulate
surplus to maintain their domination and subordination over the have-
nots.
1) Doshi, S.L.& Jain, P.C. (1999). Rural Sociology. New Delhi: Rawat
Publications.
** ** **
108 Rural and Urban Sociology
7.2 INTRODUCTION
In the past few decades there has been an emerging interest among
scholars in understanding social movements as agents of social change.
Social Movements arise due to dissatisfaction with some aspects of existing
society and efforts are geared to rectify it by creating a new order. Social
Movements could be divided into two types: Old Social Movements and
New Social Movements. Old Social Movements are different from New
Social Movements on the basis of issues focusing on quality of life,
organizational form which consisted of loose network of people, new action
repertories like use of mass media to gain support, non-violent in nature,
greater discretionary resources, have cheaper and quick geographical
mobility, collaboration of different organizations and new social
constituencies comprising of first time protestors, feminists, students, retired
Rural and Urban Sociology 109
In the previous unit, we have discussed about the continuity and changes
in Caste, Class and Power in Rural India. In this unit we shall be focusing
on peasant movements in India as it is one of the prominent social
movements taking place in rural India.Peasant Movement(s) is termed
differently by different scholars like peasant struggle, peasant uprising,
peasant discontent, peasant unrest, peasant agitation and peasant
revolution. Peasant Movements are a kind of social movements to end the
exploitation of the peasants and improve their conditions. Peasants are
people who are directly involved in agriculture and they generate source of
living out of it. Peasants comprises of tenants, sharecroppers, small farmers,
hired labourers and landless labourers who work for landlords and rich
farmers. Daniel Thorner has divided peasants into three categories: Malik,
Kisan and Mazdoor. Malik are peasants who have land ownership
documents. The tillers of the soil who do not have land ownership documents
are known as Kisan. Sharecroppers are also included in the category of
Kisan. Mazdoor comprises of the landless agricultural labourers. Peasants
can also be categorized on the basis of size of landholdings into rich
peasants, small peasants, marginal farmers and landless peasants. Rich
peasants comprise those peasants who own more than 15 acres of land.
Poor Peasants are those who own land between 2.5 to 5 acres of land.
Marginal farmers are those who own land below 2.5 acres. Landless
peasants are those who do not have any ownership of land and work in
agricultural land for wages as sharecroppers or tenants. In reality there is
no prescribed typology of who constitutes peasants but the category is
defined according to empirical situations. Peasant Movements in India could
be traced to the period of colonial rule in India. The movement got impetus
with the nationalist struggle for freedom roughly during 1920s. But it gained
momentum during 1930s as the peasants who were affected by the
economic depression caused due to Second World War. Some of the
peasant movements which took place during the colonial rule in India are
discussed in the following section.
The agrarian crisis during the end of First World War in 1918 marked
the entry of peasants into the political arena and led to the development of
their political consciousness. They formed their own organization, own
programmes along with their own flag. Prior to 1918 there were peasant
movements in colonial India but these had limited economic aims. For
example, the peasant movements during 1860-1897were mostly due to
economic crisis caused by recurrent famines and were directed against
the zamindars, moneylenders and the British government. The tactics used
by peasantsfollowed a pattern: first refusal to pay taxes, then disobeying
the dictates of the courts, following obstruction to eviction and finally an
armed uprising.Onesuchpeasant movement where the peasants refused
to pay taxes and revolted against the British rule is the Phulaguriuprising of
Assam in October 1861. The high fertility of the lands of the Brahmaputra
valley facilitated the peasants to carry on with agriculture as their primary
vocation, and, as a result, they did not feel the necessity to work in tea
gardens of the British planters. In order to induce the peasants to work in
tea plantations the peasants were pauperized through high taxes and
introduction of income tax. The peasants revolted against the British rule
through non-payment of taxes, disobedience of the dictates of the British
officials and finally taking to arms. The movement was suppressed by
sentencing the leaders and imprisoning the others. But it left a mark in the
pages of history of peasant movements in colonial India which was a direct
revolt against the British rule.
Peasants in colonial India became part of the global trade. Fall in cotton
prices during Civil War in United States of America hit the peasants hard.
Cotton was exported as a cash crop and the fall in its prices led to
indebtedness of many peasants. To bail the peasants out of their debt,
Deccan Agriculturalists Relief Act was passed in 1879.Peasant Movements
broke out in various parts of colonial India. Some of these movements are
discussed below:
was repressed in 1951. With the end of the movement forced/bonded labour
was abolished, jagirdari system was abolished, lands were redistributed to
the landless, minimum wages of agricultural labourers were increased and
a new era ushered in the all round development of the peasants.
Thus, from the discussion, it can be inferred that the state has developed
several ways to reconstruct the rural society in India and strive for its all
round development. Inspite of the several state efforts and launching of
several governmental schemes limited section of rural society gets the
benefits and sometimes the schemes are not properly implemented adding
to the list of welfare schemes, which remain just on paper. The role of the
state does not end in launching of welfare benefits for the deprived sections
of rural society but also in its efficient implementation, ensuring the benefits
and welfare measures reach ]the targeted population.
2) Doshi, S.L.& Jain, P.C. (1999). Rural Sociology. New Delhi: Rawat
Publications.
Q 1: Discuss how Old Social Movements were different from New Social
Movements.
** *** **