SOC 128

Society in India: Structure, Organisation and Change Course

Material

Prepared by: Dr. Sukriti Chowdhary (Visiting Faculty)

Amity School of Psychology and Applied Sciences (AIPS)

Amity University (Noida)

1
S.NO. Quadrant Particular Topic Page No.
/s
Module 01

1 Quadrant-I (e-Tutorial) Weblinks 3

2 Quadrant-II - (e-Content) Course Material 4-29

Lecture 01 Structure and Composition of 4-5

Indian Society
Lecture 02 Villages in India 5-9

Lecture 03 Towns and Cities in India 9-14

Lecture 04 Rural and Urban Linkages 14-21

Lecture 05 Unity and Diversity in Indian 21-29

Society
3 Quadrant-III - Lecture 06 Assessment 30-31
(Assessment)

4 Quadrant-IV - Lecture 07 Discussion Forum (Case Study) 32

(Discussion Forum)

MODULE 1:
 The structure and composition of Indian Society
 Villages, Towns and Cities
 Rural and Urban Linkages
 Unity and Diversity in Indian Society

2
 QUADRANT - I (e-Tutorial)
1. Indian Village & Characteristics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWpGJV6IyKI

2. What are Urban-Rural Linkages?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVCFd5jsarc

3. Unity in Diversity: Indian Sociology

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=72_MQUInvbw

4. Salient features of Indian Society:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ3OWFTwyvw

3
 Quadrant-II - (e-Content)
Structure and Composition of Indian Society
The structure and composition of Indian society are complex and diverse due to the country’s
long history, multiple cultural influences, and large population. India is known for its rich cultural
heritage, ancient traditions, and social stratification. Below are some key aspects that
characterize the structure and composition of Indian society:
 Caste System: One of the defining features of Indian society is the caste system. It is a
traditional social hierarchy that categorizes people into four main varnas (caste categories)
– Brahmins (priests and scholars), Kshatriyas (warriors and rulers), Vaishyas (merchants and
traders), and Shudras (laborers and service providers). Outside of these varnas are the Dalits
(formerly known as untouchables) who were historically marginalized and considered
outside the caste system. The caste system has had a significant impact on social and
economic relations in India.

 Religious Diversity: India is home to several major religions, including Hinduism, Islam,
Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism, and Jainism, among others. This religious diversity
contributes to the multicultural fabric of Indian society. Religion often plays a crucial role
in shaping people’s identities and influencing social practices.

 Regional Diversity: India is a vast country with 28 states and 8 union territories, each with its
own distinct language, culture, and traditions. The regional diversity is reflected in food,
clothing, festivals, and social norms.

 Language and Linguistic Diversity: India is a linguistically diverse nation with over 1,600
languages spoken across the country. While Hindi is the official language at the national
level, each state has its official language(s). Linguistic diversity is a source of pride and also
sometimes a challenge in communication and governance.

 Family Structure: Traditional Indian society is known for its strong emphasis on family and
extended family networks. The family structure often includes multiple generations living
together under one roof and is based on strong kinship ties.

 Gender Roles: Gender roles in Indian society have been influenced by cultural and historical
factors. While progress has been made towards gender equality, traditional gender norms
can still be prevalent in some areas, leading to gender-based disparities.

 Urban-Rural Divide: India experiences a significant gap between urban and rural areas in terms
of access to resources, education, healthcare, and employment opportunities.

 Education and Literacy: India has made substantial progress in increasing literacy rates, but
there are still disparities in access to education, especially in rural and marginalized
communities.

4
 Modernization and Globalization: India is experiencing the impact of modernization and
globalization, leading to changes in social attitudes, family structures, and lifestyles,
particularly in urban areas.

 Social Mobility and Reservations: Efforts have been made to promote social mobility and
reduce caste-based discrimination through affirmative action policies, commonly known as
“reservations,” which provide quotas for marginalized communities in education and
government jobs.
It’s important to note that Indian society is continually evolving, and these aspects might have
changed to some extent beyond my last update in September 2021. As with any society, India’s
structure and composition are multifaceted, and generalizations may not fully capture the
nuances and complexities of individual experiences and local contexts.

VILLAGE
The term ‘village’ refers to a small area with a small population that follows agriculture not only
as an occupation but also as a way of life it has been said that village is the name commonly used
to designate “settlement of ancient agriculturalists”.
The village, town and city are categories of human settlements. These categories are dependent
on each other for economic, social and political purposes. Very often people from village migrate
to towns and cities in search of new livelihoods and occupations. The villagers sell their
agricultural products in nearby towns and cities and buy essential commodities which they
cannot grow or produce themselves. They are dependant on towns and cities for many goods and
services.
The townsmen are also dependent on villages for food products like vegetables, food grains,
milk, human labour etc. The point to mention here is that the categories of human settlement are
inter dependent on each other for raw materials on villages, towns and cities produce other
furnished goods which need higher technology and more organisation. Therefore, they are all
dependent on each other but there are some distinctive features which separate them from each
other. In this unit we will discuss about the features of these three categories of human
settlements: village, town and city. This will enable students to have a clear understanding of
these categories.

India is a country where majority of population lives in rural areas. According to 2011 Census,
the country has 640, 887 villages. Most of these villages have less than 1000 residents. It is
important to mention here that even in recent times, more than 69 per cent people live in the
villages compared to 31 per cent urban dwellers. Therefore, we can say that India is a country of
villages. As village is the basic unit of rural society and majority of Indian population is
living in rural areas, to have a better understanding of Indian society it is imperative to explain
to you the basic characteristics of Indian villages, their evolution, their nature and structure,
culture and the rural way of life.

The Issue of Village Autonomy

In the early periods of the colonial rule in India, the studies by Henry Maine (1881), Charles
Metcalfe (1833) and Baden-Powell (1896) gave an exaggerated notion of village autonomy. The

5
Indian village was portrayed as a ‘closed’ and ‘isolated’ system. In a report of the Select
Committee of the House of Commons England, Charles Metcalfe (1833), a British administrator
in India, depicted the Indian village as a monolithic, atomistic and unchanging entity. He
observed, “The village communities are little republics, having nearly everything that they want
within themselves and almost independent of any foreign relations”. Further, he stated that wars
pass over it, regimes come and go, but the village as a society always emerges ‘unchanged,
unshaken, and self-sufficient’.
Recent historical, anthropological and sociological studies have however shown that Indian
village was hardly ever a republic. It was never self-sufficient. It has links with the wider society
Migration, village exogamy, movement for work and trade, administrative connection,
interregional market, inter-village economic and caste links and religious pilgrimage were
prevalent in the past, connecting the village with the neighbouring villages and the wider society.
Moreover, new forces of modernisation in the modern period augmented inter-village and rural
urban interaction.
But despite increasing external linkages village is still a fundamental social unit (Mandelbaum
1972, Orenstein 1965). People living in a village have a feeling of common identity. They have
intra-village ties at familial, caste and class levels in social, economic, political and cultural
domains. In fact, village life is characterised by reciprocity, cooperation, dominance and
competition.
India is a country of ancient civilisation that goes back to the Indus Valley Civilisation, which
flourished during the third millennium B.C. Since then except for a brief interlude during the
Rig-Vedic period (Circa 1500-1000 B.C. ) when the urban centres were overrun, rural and urban
centres have co-existed in India.
Rural and urban centres share some common facets of life. They show interdependence
especially in the sphere of economy, urbanward migration, and townsmen or city dwellers’
dependence on villages for various products (e.g. foodgrains, milk, vegetables, raw materials for
industry) and increasing dependence of villagers on towns for manufactured goods and market.
Despite this interdependence between the two there are certain distinctive features which
separate them from each other in terms of their size, demographic composition, cultural
moorings, style of life, economy, employment and social relations.

Village and Its Social Structure

Family is the basic unit of almost all societies. It is especially true in India where the very
identity of a person is dependent on the status and position of his or her family and its social
status.

Family in Rural India

Family is one of the most important social institution which constitutes the rural society. It caters
to needs and performs functions, which are essential for the continuity, integration and change
in the social system, such as, reproduction, production and socialization.
Broadly speaking there are two types of family : (a) nuclear family consisting of husband, wife
and unmarried children, and (b) joint or extended family comprising a few more kins than the
nuclear type. Important dimensions of ‘jointness’ of family are coresidentiality, commensality,
coparcenary, generation depth (three), and fulfillment of obligation towards kin and sentimental
aspect.
Coresidentiality means that members of a family live under the same roof. Commensality implies
that they eat together i.e., have a common kitchen. Coparcenary means that they have joint
ownership of property. Further, generation depth encompasses three generations or more, i.e.
grandfather, father and the son or more. Members of the family also have obligations toward
their kin. Moreover, they have a sentimental attachment to the ideal of joint family.

6
Rural family works as the unit of economic, cultural, religious, and political activities.
Collectivity of the family is emphasised in social life, and the feelings of individual and personal
freedom are very limited. Marriage is considered an inter-familial matter rather than an inter-
personal affair. It is governed by rules of kinship.
This is witnessed in the prevalence of the rules of village exogamy and ‘gotra exogamy’ in the
North but not in the South. In the North, nobody is permitted to marry in his/her own village.
Marriage alliances are concluded with the people from other villages belonging to similar caste.
But no such proscriptions exist in the South. Further, in the North one cannot marry within his/her
own gotra. On the contrary, cross cousin marriage i.e., marriage between the children of brother
and sister, is preferred in the South. Thus, there is a centrifugal tendency in North India, i.e., the
direction of marriage is outward or away from the group. In contrast in South India we find a
centripetal tendency in making marriage alliances and building kinship ties. In other words,
marriages take place inwardly or within the group. Another important characteristic of the village
social structure was the ‘jajman system’.

The Jajmani System

A very important feature of traditional village life in India is the ‘jajmani’ system. It has
been studied by various sociologists, viz., Willian Wiser (1936), S.C. Dube (1955), Opler and
Singh (1986), K. Ishwaran (1967), Lewis and Barnouw (1956). The term ‘jajman’ refers to the
patron or recipient of specialised services and the term ‘jajmani’ refers to the whole
relationship. In fact, the jajmani system is a system of economic, social and ritual ties among
different caste groups in a village. Under this system some castes are patrons and others are
serving castes.
The serving castes offer their services to the landowning upper and intermediate caste and in turn
are paid both in cash and kind. The patron castes are the landowning dominant castes, e.g.,
Rajput, Bhumihar, Jat in the North, and Kamma, Lingayat and Reddi in Andhra Pradesh and
Patel in Gujarat. The service castes comprise Brahmin (priest), barber, carpenter, blacksmith,
water-carrier, leatherworker etc. The jajmani relations essentially operate at family level
(Mandelbaum, 1972). A Rajput land-owning family has its jajmani ties with one family each
from Brahmin, barber, carpenter etc., and a family of service caste offers its services to specific
families of jajmans. However, jajmani rules are enforced by caste panchayats. The jajmani
relationship is supposed to be and often is durable, exclusive and multiple. Jajmani tie is
inherited on both sides i.e. patron and client (the Jajman and the Kamin). The relationship is
between specific families. Moreover, it is more than exchange of grain and money in lieu of
service. On various ritual occasions, such as marriage, birth and death, the service-castes render
their services to their jajman and get gifts in addition to customary payments. In factional
contests each side tries to muster the support of its jajmani associates. Hence the jajmani
system involves interdependence, reciprocity and cooperation between jati and families in
villages. But the jajmani system also possesses the elements of dominance, exploitation
and conflict (Beidelman, 1959 and Lewis and Barnouw, 1956). There is a vast difference in
exercise of power between landowning dominant patrons and poor artisans and landless
labourers who serve them. The rich and powerful jajmans exploit and coerce the poor
‘kamins’ (client) to maintain their dominance. In fact, there is reciprocity as well as
dominance in the jajmani system. Further, it has been observed the especially after
Independence in 1947, the

7
jajmani system has weakened over the years due to market forces, increased urban contact,
migration, education and social and political awareness on the part of the service castes.

Changes in Village Power Structure and Leadership

Marginal changes of adaptive nature have occurred in power structure and leadership in villages
after gaining independence due to various factors e.g. land reforms, panchayati raj, parliamentary
politics, development programmes and agrarian movements. According to Singh (1986), upper
castes now exercise power not by traditional legitimisation of their authority but through
manipulation and cooption of lower caste people. The traditional power structure itself has not
changed. New opportunities motivate the less powerful class to aspire for power. But their
economic backwardness thwarts their desires. B.S. Cohn (1962), and Singh R. (1988) in his
comparative study of twelve villages of India, found a close fit between land-ownership and
degree of domination of groups. Now younger and literate people are found increasingly
acquiring leadership role. Moreover, some regional variations also have been observed in the
pattern of change in power structure in rural areas.

Characteristics of the village community

I. Based on Social Organization
In India, there are half a million villages about 8% population lives in villages. Hence, in every
respect, the future of India is very much linked with the development of villages.
ii. Smaller size
Village communities are smaller in size sensors assign a place with 5000 in habitants as village
community 80% of Indian villages have a population less than 1000.
iii. Joint family system
The joint family still shapes the basic structural unit in the rural community. all the members of
the family stay together under the same roof take food cooded in same hearth, take part in
religious activity together hold proper by together. it is established that number of.
iv. Agriculture economy
Agricultural is considered as the most profound way of life for the villagers as their entire mode
of social life experience around agriculture . A very small amount population resies upon non-
agricultural occupation such as carpentry ,animal husbandry ,pottery.
v. Jajmani system
It is another feature of rural life of India. under the system people of one cast tender their services
to the people of other caste. In return ,They would get paid in terms of crops and grains at the
time of marriages and child birth they got additional wages the one who are offered such services
are called jajmans and the ones who offer the services are called parajans or kami’s.
vi. Panchayat system.
The Panchayat system is another important factor of villages people of different castes assemble
to settle their disputes they what guided by the head of the panchayat whose decisions are
considered final.
Growth of village community

8
Topographical factors – land contributed to permanent settlement of village community water
availability and climate also contribute in growth and property of villages.
Economic factor – improvement in the condition of agriculture. Cottage industries also provide
additional income to villagers.
Social factors – Peace is significant people like to live in peaceful places so that their crops
should not be damaged by outsiders. security and cooperation

TOWNS AND CITIES IN INDIA: PATTERNS OF

URBANISATION
India passed through a phase of rapid urbanisation in the twentieth century. The modern urban
centres perform diversified functions in terms of economic, administrative, political, cultural and
so on. Here, it is very difficult to classify the towns and cities in terms of a single activity.
Generally, people classify urban areas on the basis of some prominent socio-economic and
political features. For example, people mention that there are historical cities like Delhi, Kolkata,
Varanasi, Lucknow etc., industrial cities like Ghaziabad, Modinagar, Kanpur, Jamshedpur,
Bhilai etc., religious cities like Mathura, Hardwar, Madurai, Allahabad etc. Cities reputed for
film making, like Mumbai and Chennai, have a special appeal for a villager or a small-town
dweller. In sociology, we discuss the pattern of urbanisation in terms of its demographic, spatial,
economic and socio-cultural aspects. But before we take up these aspects, let us also briefly
explain how we define a town in the Indian context.

Definition of a Town or City

Town
Any human settlement that is larger or bigger than villages termed as town in many parts of the
world .in India, a Census town in this in one who is not administered as a town but its population
has the characteristics of town. They are characteristic by follows.

 population exceeds 5000

 75% of population employed outside agriculture.
 minimum population density 400 persons per kilometer square.
In India, the demographic and economic indexes are important in defining specific areas as
town or city. The definitional parameters of an urban area in India have undergone several
changes and modifications over the years. The following definition of town adopted in 1901
census was used until 1961.
a) Every municipality, cantonment and all civil lines (not included in a municipality), and
b) Every other continuous collection of houses permanently inhabited by not less than 5,000
persons, which the provincial superintendent of census may decide to treat as a town.

The main criterion for describing any area or settlement as urban was its administrative set-up
and size and not the economic characteristics. As a consequence of this definition many of the
towns in reality were considered only as overgrown villages.

In 1961 the ‘urban area’ was redefined taking into account the economic characteristics in
addition to other administrative and demographic features. The definition adopted in 1961 census

9
was also used in 1971 and 1981. And it remained unchanged in 1991 and 2001 also. According
to this definition an urban area is:

a) a place which is either a municipal corporation or a municipal area, or under a town committee
or a notified area committee or cantonment board,
b) any place which satisfies the following criteria of: a minimum of 5,000 persons at least 75 per
cent of the male working population should be in occupations which are non-agricultural a
density of not less than 400 persons per square kilometer, and a place should have certain
pronounced urban characteristics and amenities such as newly found industrial areas, large
housing settlements, places of tourist importance and civic amenities.

A slight change has taken place in this definition since 1961 and 1971. After 1991 and 1981 the
workers in the occupation of forestry, fishing, livestock, hunting, logging, plantations and
orchards, etc. which were earlier treated as industrial activity came to be recognized as
agricultural activity in 1981 & 1991 to be counted as agricultural occupation.
Apart from well defined towns and/or cities, the outgrowths of cities and tows have also been
treated as urban agglomerations. At the 1961 census, the concept of ‘town group’ was adopted
to obtain a broad picture relating to urban spread. This was refined in 1971 with the concept of
urban agglomeration to obtain better feed back in regard to urban continuity, process and trends
of urbanisation and other related matters. This concept without any change or modification has
remained operative till 2001 census. An urban agglomeration forms a continuous urban spread
and normally consists of a town and its adjoining urban outgrowth or two or more physically
contiguous towns together with contiguous and well organised outgrowths, if any, of such town.
(Census Report 2001).
While describing the urban places, the Indian census records consistently employ population size
to classify the urban area into six classes as shown below:

Classification of cities
Class l with 1,00,000 and more population
Class ll with 50,000 to 99,999 population
Class lll with 20,000 .... 49,999 population
Class lV with 10,000 .... 19,999 population
Class V with 5,000 .... 9,000 population
Class Vl with less than .... 5,000 population

In India, urban places with less than 1,00,000 population are referred to as “towns”, while urban
places with 1,00,000 or more population are referred to as“cities”. Urban centres with more than
one million population are categorised as metropolitan cities. The metropolitan centres are a class
by themselves characterised by large-scale consumption, and large quantum of inflow of people,
goods, services and information (Prakasa Rao 1982: 17). Having described how urban area in
India is classified into various categories of towns/ cities, we now
discuss some aspects of the pattern of urbanisation in India.

Characteristics of town:
A town consist of socially heterogeneous people who do not known each other very well with
different lifestyle and social contact. Town is a largest settlement inhabiting thousands of
facilities of different culture a backgrounds and languages.
It is difficult to trace the origin of city or to define .it everyone seems to know about city best no
one has given satisfactory definition.

10
A city is believed to come in existence when a society or group within access the control over it
resources more than necessary the cities of Indus Valley civil section where the Centre of trade
and Commerce. The new techniques of production and improved means of communication and
transport improve the development of cities.
Classification of cities:
Cities are generally Classified based on functions performed flow ever all cities are essential to
be multifunctional. A small town would full fill at least following two takes. Serving it’s
inhabitants meeting the needs of surrounding area.

Demographic Aspect
In India, population concentration has been one of the key features of urbanisation. The
percentage of urban population has been little more than doubled from 10.8 per cent in 1901 to
23.3 per cent in 1981. And this has been almost tripled by 2001, when it has been recorded to be
27.8 per cent. The urban population of India as per the 1991 census is 217,177,625 and this
accounts for 25.72 per cent of the total population. So far urban population of the country is
concerned, only 25.85 million lived in towns in 1901 and by 1991 it increased by more than 8
times to 217.18 million. Out of the total population of 1027 million as on 1st March 2001, 285
million lived in urban areas. The net addition of population in urban areas during 1991-2001 has
been to the tune of 68 million where as during the decade 1981-1991 it was 61 million.
Urban population has significantly increased in the post Independence period.
For the forty years period from 1901 to 1941 the increase of urban population from 25.85 to
44.15 million has been quite modest compared to the 62.44 million of the next decade. There has
been an increase of 115.05 million in urban population from 1941 to 1981. Note that 64.8 per
cent of this population has grown in the two decades between 1961 and 1981. Similarly the urban
population has almost doubled in the decades 1971 (109.11 million) to 1991 (217.18 million).
There was a slow growth (and also decline in 1911) in the proportion of urban to total population
in the early decades (1901-21). This is mostly because of natural disasters and slow rate of
industrial and economic development. The rapid growth of urban population during 1941-51 has
been mostly due to partition of the country and other political reasons, which led to refugee
migration in the urban areas. The steady increase in the urban population in the decades prior to
1981 came about not so much because of planned economic development and industrialisation,
but due to imbalanced agricultural development. The annual rate of growth of urban population
declined from 3.83 per cent during 1971- 1981 to 3.09 per cent during 1981-1991. During the
decade 1971-1981 the level of urbanisation increased by 3.43 per cent points. During 1981-1991
decade the increase has been only 2.38 per cent. The increase in the urbanisation further declined
to 2.1 per cent points during the decade 1991-2001. As a consequence the annual rate of gain in
percentage of urban population has also declined from 1.72 to 1.02 during the decade 1981-1991.
This indicates that the tempo of urbanisation in India has slowed down since 1981. The slow
growth of rate of urbanisation; however; once again rose rapidly as per the 2011 census report.
Due to higher economic growth and other factors; total population living in urban areas became
377 million or 31.1 per cent of the total population. (Bhagat, R.B. 2011).

Spatial Pattern
Spatial disparities have marked the Indian urban scenario. These disparities emerged mainly due
to regional disparities, imbalanced population concentration and some times because of the
change in the census definition of “urban areas”.
In this context we need to mention about two concepts, namely over-urbanisation
and sub-urbanisation.

11
i) Over-urbanisation
Towns or urban areas have certain limitations in accommodating population, providing civic
amenities or catering to such needs as schooling, hospitals etc. Beyond certain optimum
capacities, it becomes difficult for the town administration to provide facilities for the increasing
population. Mumbai and Kolkata are two such examples of cities which have urban-population
growth beyond their capacities to manage. This feature is refer to as overurbanisation.

ii) Sub-urbanisation
Closely related to over-urbanisation of a town is a feature called suburbanisation. When towns
get over-crowded by population, it may result in sub-urbanisation. Delhi is a typical example
(among others) where suburbanisation trend is taking place around it. Sub-urbanisation means
urbanisation of rural areas around the towns characterised by the following features:
a) a sharp increase in the ‘urban (non-agricultural) uses’ of land
b) inclusion of surrounding areas of town within its municipal limits, and
c) intensive communication of all types between town and its surrounding areas.

THE GROWTH OF TOWNS AND CITIES

The growth of urban towns did not show a unidirectional progress in India. Because of the
variation in the census definition of ‘urban’ areas the number of urban centres declined. Only
1,430 towns out of a total of 1,914 towns existing in 1901 survived till 1961. About 480 areas
considered as towns in 1901 lost their urban status because of the new definition of town in 1961
census. It is for this reason that one can see the decrease in the number of towns to 2700 in 1961
compared to 3060 in 1951. For example, in Rajasthan there were 227 towns in 1951, whereas
this number declined to 201 in 1981. Similar decline has also been noticed in Andhra Pradesh,
Karnataka and Maharashtra. In the 1991 census 4,689 places were identified as towns as against
4,029 in 1981 census. Out of the 4,689 towns of 1991 as many as 2,996 were statutory towns and
1, 693 were census or non-municipal towns as against 2,758 and 1, 271 respectively in 1981. At
the all-India level, 93 of the 4029 towns of 1981 census were declassified and 103 towns were
fully merged with other towns by statutory notifications of the concerned state/union territory
administrations during 1981-1991. As many as 856 new towns were added to the urban frame of
1991. The maximum number of towns declassified were from the states of Punjab (21),
Karnataka (19), and Andhra Pradesh (13) and the maximum number of the statutory towns added
in 1991 census was from Madhya Pradesh (91). However 2011 census which recorded a rise in
urban population and urbanization rate of 27.7% in the whole county in 2001 to 31.1% in 2011;
which is an increase of 3.3% per centage points. During this census of 2011 also several villages
were recognised as towns, there by increasing the number of towns in India.

Variation in Urbanisation among the States

The pattern of urbanisation among different states in India shows an interesting feature of urban
domination in some states. Five states namely Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West
Bengal and Andhra Pradesh altogether accounted for 56 per cent (in 1961) to 55 per cent (in
1971) of the total urban population of India. In contrast the six states of Odisha (Orissa), Haryana,
Assam (including Meghalaya), Jammu and Kashmir, Himachal Pradesh and Nagaland account
for 5 per cent (in 1961) to 5.5 per cent (in 1971) of the total urban population of India. In 1991
census some of the states having a higher proportion of urban population to the total population
than the national average of 25.72 per cent were Maharashtra (35.73 per cent), Gujarat (34.40
percent), Tamil Nadu (34.20 per cent) and West Bengal (27.39 per cent). As per the Census 2001,
Tamil Nadu (43.9 per cent) is the most urbanised state followed by Maharashtra (42.4 per cent)
and Gujarat (37.4 per cent). The proportion of the urban population is lowest in Bihar with 10.5

12
per cent followed by Assam (12.7 per cent) and Odisha (14.9 per cent). Himachal Pradesh is the
least urbanised states. These show that the urban domination in some states continues to exist
even at the beginning of twenty first century. Between 1961 and 1971 the pattern of urban
density for Indian states shows somewhat similar trends. The states of West Bengal, Uttar
Pradesh, Punjab, Assam and Kerala have densities higher than the all India average of 2948
persons per sq. km in 1961. A similar trend was found in 1971 also.
States of Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh, Nagaland, Jammu and Kashmir, Orissa, Bihar and
Rajasthan had densities less than the all India average of 2,048 in 1961. The 1971 census
reflected the same trend that was seen in 1961, with respect to the above mentioned states. Urban
density for Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and Assam lessened, during 1961-71 decade, possibly
because of outward migration of people. In the year 1991, the urban density was highest in the
state of West Bengal followed by Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Haryana and Punjab. States of
Tamil Nadu, Nagaland, Jammu and Kashmir, Orissa, Bihar and Rajasthan had densities less than
the all India average of 3,370 in 1991 also. Thus when we look at the census figures we can see
that the variation in terms of the urban density continued to the year 1991 almost unchanged.

Population concentration in the cities

The population in the larger urban centres (with 1,00,000 or more) has constantly been growing
in India. In 1981 more than 60 per cent of the urban population in India lived in this category of
cities. By 1991 their rate the 1991 census, in 300 cities the population exceeds 1,00,000 each.
These 300 urban agglomeration/cities account for 64.89 per cent of the urban population of the
country. In the case of Maharashtra and West Bengal the share of Class l urban agglomerations/
cities in the urban population is high, being 77.85 per cent and 81.71 per cent respectively. Class
l urban agglomeration/ cities contribute about two thirds of the urban population in the states of
Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Karnataka, Kerala, Meghalaya and
Tamil Nadu.

Growth of Metropolitan Cities

In India, Kolkata was the only city with a population of over a million in 1901. Mumbai crossed
the one million mark by 1911. Till 1941 there were only these two cities in this category, i.e.,
with a population of over one million. Delhi, Chennai and Hyderabad entered into this category
by 1951. Ahmedabad and Bangalore by 1961, and Kanpur and Pune by 1971.
Lucknow, Nagpur and Jaipur by 1981 crossed the one million mark bringing the number of
million-plus cities upto 12. At the time of 1991 census enumeration there were 23 metropolitan
agglomerations/ cities with a population of more than a million each. The number almost doubled
during the decade 1981-1991. Its number has been increased to 35 at the time of
2001 census. At the time of 1981census 25 per cent of the total urban population was
concentrated in the million-plus cities. By the year 1991 this has become 32.54 per cent. That
means that these cities in 1991 accounted for roughly one third of the country’s urban population
and one twelfth of the country’s total population.
In 1981 barring Delhi which forms part of the Union Territory of Delhi, the remaining 11 cities
are located in 8 states. In 1991, the 23 metropolitan cities were scattered among 13 states in India.
But their concentration was more in Gujarat, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, and Uttar Pradesh, each
having 3 such metropolitan cities. Andhra Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh have two each and 7
were distributed among Bihar, Karnataka, Kerala, Punjab, Rajasthan, West Bengal and Delhi. In
Kolkata the concentration of urban population was higher than other metropolitan cities for the
decade 1971- 81. This was followed by Bangalore, Chennai and Ahmedabad. The 23
metropolitan cities exhibited quite a diversified pattern of growth of
population during 1981-1991. Of these metropolitan cities the highest growth of population was
recorded in Visakhapatanam urban agglomeration (74.27 per cent) followed by Hyderabad urban

13
agglomeration (67.04 per cent), both of which are in Andhra Pradesh. The lowest growth rate
was recorded by Kolkata urban agglomeration (18.73 per cent) followed by Patna urban
agglomeration. Kolkata urban agglomeration which occupied the prime position since 1901 in
terms of highest concentration of urban population relegated to the second position in 1991 and
Greater Mumbai which occupied the second position since 1901 has been moved to the prime
position in 1991. Kolkata was followed by Delhi, Chennai, Hyderabad and Bengaluru.
In 1988, while describing the glaring disparities that marked the Indian urban scene, the National
Commission on Urbanisation stated two main aspects: (a) while the urban centres in India grew
at an average rate of 46.2 per cent during the 1970s, the million-plus metropolitan centres had an
97 average growth rate of population only 29.6 per cent during the same period,
and (b) the significant regional variation in the nature of urbanisation process. Indeed, spatially
the pattern of Indian urbanisation has been highly localised.

RURAL AND URBAN LINKAGES

The two terms, ‘rural’ and ‘urban’, are relative. Therefore, they can be understood in relationship of
each other. Each one refers to a society that is formed in a distinct ecological setting. Hence, society
formed in rural ecology is called rural society and the one formed in urban ecology is known as
urban society. Rural ecology is close to the nature and land, bearing comparatively much less
alterations whereas urban ecology or city is artificial, i.e., cultured form of the nature. Thus, the two
societies are chiefly distinguished by their ecology. They are distinguished in the following
comparison(V K Srivastava2005:315-49):

1. Rural society is smaller than urban society in terms of both population and physical area. Rural
society may or may not have modern institutions like police station, dispensary and hospital,
school, post office, club, etc. If they exist they are inadequate or lacking the facilities
that are found in its urban counterpart.

2. Rural society has low density of population that may be clustered on the basis of social status,
that is, the people occupying the same status may
share the same neighborhood and may observe considerable social and, sometimes, physical
distance from others, especially those who are positioned low in caste/class/power hierarchy. On
the other hand, the urban population is large in size, heterogeneous in composition and
secular in attitude.

3. A sizable rural population is engaged in agriculture which is the mainstay of rural life. Besides,
rural society has several other groups engaged in various arts and crafts, usually known as
artisans and crafts persons, who regularly supply their services to agriculturists in exchange for
foodgrains and cereals. Contrary to this, urban population is largely
engaged in secondary (manufacturing) and tertiary (servicing) occupations.

4. Rural society has some full time and a large number of part time specialists. craftsmen and
artisans also indulge in agricultural pursuits, especially during the monsoons. The agricultural
produce of small agriculturists is mainly for domestic consumption whereas manufactured
goods and services in urban society are meant for supply in market.

5. Rural society is regarded as the repository of traditional mores and folkways. It preserves
traditional culture, and many of its values and virtues are carried forward to urban areas, of
14
which they become a part after some alterations. The maximum Indian population lives in
villages.
This denotes that villages are the abodes of majority of Indians. The villages preserve the
fundamental values of Indian society and transmit them to towns and cities. One cannot have
an idea of India’s spirit without understanding Indian villages. On the other hand, urban society
is forward-looking and future-oriented as compared to the backward-looking and slow-
changing rural society.
Thus, the terms, rural and urban, signify two societies with certain visible differences of setting,
social relations and values. Relationship between the two societies has been changing and so
perceived differently over the times.
Let us discuss changing perception of their relationship.

RURAL-URBAN RELATIONSHIP; CHANGING PERCEPTION:

The rural and the urban are part societies that form a whole (society). Instead of being static, they
interact with each other and have evolved in terms of size, structure and activities over the
centuries due to internal and external forces which have influenced their interrelationship as well.
This evolving relationship perceived at different historical phases has received different
labels such as rural-urban dichotomy, rural-urban continuum, rural-urban interactions, rural-
urban articulations, rural-urban nexus and rural-urban linkages.
Dichotomous constructions of human society are as old as social sciences, wherein the two
societies are viewed as formed of distinctive, often contradistinctive elements. Numerous
familiar distinctions made between ‘primitive’ and ‘civilized’ societies are found based on
number and diversity of social groups such as Ferdinand Tonnies’ ‘Gemeinschaft and
Gesselschaft’, Emile Durkheim’s ‘Mechanical and Organic Solidarity’, Sir Henry Maine’s
‘Status and Contract’, and Herbert Spencer’s ‘Militant and Industrial Societies’. This
conceptualization poses rural and urban communities as the polar opposites with no link between
them. The dichotomous perspective neglects the existence of continuous, interdependent,
complementary and overlapping relationship of the rural and the urban.
However, the scheme of folk-urban continuum that came into existence from 1930 onwards was
the systematic and conscious attempt to highlight inadequacy of the dichotomous notion. It
argued that societies could be arranged on the basis of their increasing or decreasing complexity.
Robert Redfield (1930) defined an ideal type, ‘folk society’, as the polar opposite of ‘urban
society’ and kept ‘rural society’ in-between. Folk society is small, isolated, non-literate and
homogeneous, with a strong sense of group solidarity and traditional, pontaneously uncritical
and personal behavior (Miner 1952). Definitive qualities of the urban type are then left as the
logically opposite to those which characterize the folk society. Redfield usually refers to urban
society as ‘modern urbanized society’. The idea implicit in using this pole is that it stands for
urbanized society in general and that modern western urban society in particular. In the studies
by Tepoztlan (1930) and Yucatan (1940) in Mexico, they have concluded that increase of Rural
Society contact brings about heterogeneity in and disorganization of culture, which is one
sufficient cause for secularization and individualism. The folk-urban continuum deals with the
problems of relative degree of presence or absence
of polar characteristics, which vary not only between cultures but also within them. Thus, the
real societies, which vary in terms of constituent elements, are conceptualized to be lying in-
between the two polar opposites of folk and urban societies on a continuum. The folk-urban

15
continuum did highlight the continuity between the rural and the urban in terms of increasing or
decreasing complexity. But falling short of revealing relationship of interdependence between
the two societies, this scheme is also not quite free from the dichotomous perception of the rural
and the urban.
After the Second World War many countries which were ruled by the western colonial powers
attained independence. In the wake of the planned development activities initiated in these newly
liberated countries the social scientists experienced a lot of newly emerging areas of interactions,
besides the traditional ones, between the rural and the urban society in these
countries. Recent changes in political, religious and economic sectors of life have added an urban
component in rural life. The nature of rural communities, therefore, called for a re-examination
of the efforts of understanding their interactions with other similar communities and urban
centres. Srinivas examined the spread of classical/great tradition of the literati
from national to regional and then to the local levels. He conceptualized how the upper strata
could provide the model of ritual behaviour which is emulated at lower levels through a process
that he called sanskritization. He opines the emulation usually takes place in the situation of
improvement in economic or political position of the group concerned due to its contact with a
source of the great tradition. When a caste/ sub-caste attempts to move upward in the local
hierarchy very often it faces opposition by the dominant caste in the village or region. McKim
Marriott used the concepts like parochialisation and universalisation to locate the downward and
upward movements of influences from the little and great traditions respectively.
Marriott looked into the form a trait underwent in the process of devolution he called
‘parochialisation’. He also pointed out the complementary process of ‘universalization’ by
comprehending the way in which a local or lowly tradition could become wider and more
sophisticated. Though interactions between the rural and the urban society have always existed,
the social scientists took a long time to look beyond the village and perceive these interactions.
The perspective of rural-urban interactions brought into relief multiple and ever-going
interactions between the two societies.
When focused on the interactions between the rural and the urban, it is not a question of rural
versusurban. Rather, it is a quest to know the way the rural is interacting with the urban and vice
versa. Rural life centered round families, kin-groups, castes, and religious groups is enriched
through its urban contacts in economic, educational, political and ritual spheres.
Modernizing agencies operate through banks, state legislation, planning and mass media in
village. Village is not an isolated entity in itself. Through its urban components it can be seen in
an active interaction with city. Both the entities, rural and urban, need to interact with each other.
They have either extended the scope of interactions of their social institutions or developed the
requisite social networks to cope with the situations.
The interactions are reflected through a mutual exchange system of goods and services between
the two sectors. The ruralites are dependent on the urbanites for their banking and credit needs,
for purchase of agricultural equipment and other supplies, for marketing of farm-products and
even for commercial recreation. In the same way, the urban sector is dependent on the
rural sector for food supply or cheap labour for the vast market of its manufactured goods, for
sale of skills and technical knowledge and for provision of administrative functions. Surplus rural
wealth beyond the needs of meeting subsistence is re-invested into agriculture in the form of
machinery and modern inputs. For this purpose, the villagers establish urban connections through
adult franchise, institutions of local government and participations in general elections. These
connections add new varieties to polity, as well as, are used to realize their interests.

16
Life in the villages that revolved round ritual cycle of the life. The regional festivals have found
new vistas in the use of technology-- trucks, tractors, buses, motorcycles, decorations and
electronic media. Growing commercialization of agriculture both in food crops and cash crops
is evident in the acquisition of new technology and the growing urban institutions in the
villages (Chauhan 1990). The emerging new life style of the villagers reflects the cultural
assimilation between ruralites and urbanites. The extension of schooling and medical, transport
and communication facilities to rural areas has reduced the gap and the relations between the
rural and the urban no longer remain antagonistic. Though the older generation by habit wanted
to remain rural, the new generation looks towards the city for better educational and career
opportunities or adopting new life styles.
The rural-urban interactions broadly comprise three aspects; namely, the nature of activities-
exploitative or co-operative, the spheres of activities such as economic, political and cultural and
the traditional or modern way in which the rural-urban interactions are reflected. Social structure
is the best tool to confine the fields of interaction to the territory of an entity but when
these fields cut across each other’s boundaries and territory of the community it is weak as a tool
of analysis. ‘Network’ and ‘Modes of Production’ are two other important approaches to
understand rural-urban relations. The term ‘network’ introduced first by Radcliffe-Brown (1965)
while defining social structure as a complex network of relations but John Barnes first used it as
an analytical tool to analyse Norwegian Island Parish by dividing it into three
fields; viz., the stationary field dominated by the domestic, agricultural and administrative areas,
the fluid field dominated by industrial area and the ‘third field’, that linked the other two, termed
as social network (1954:237).
Emphasizing the relevance of the concept of social network in the analysis of articulation/
connectivity between rural and urban communities, B R Chauhan found this concept useful in
analyzing the cultural, political, administrative and economic dimensions of the social
phenomenon. He has extensively shown various rural–urban interactions and intermediaries in
day to day life in the villages of western Uttar Pradesh.
\
By the end of the last century, the rural-urban interactions in India received new labels like rural-
urban articulations (Chauhan1990) and country-town nexus (Sharma1997). In the recent few
decades a new term, rural-urban linkages, has emerged for the rural-urban relationship. Let us
discuss the rural-urban linkages in India.

The era of liberalization, privatization and globalization that started in India in 1990s
accompanied by advent of new technologies in the areas of communication, information, new
media,transport, and consumerism intensified the rural-urban interactionsand gave rise to far
better physical, psychic, social, cultural, economic and political connectivity between the
rural and urban societies in the wake of reduction of distance, time and cultural barriers. With
these developments the relationship between the rural and the urban is being perceived in the
form of their connections that are conceived through the term, rural-urban linkages, giving an
impression that rural and urban are connected in various ways rather than being segregated.
This term in a way subsumes most of the earlier concepts like rural-urban continuum, rural-urban
interactions, rural-urban articulations and villagetown nexus.
The term ‘linkage’ refers to a link or connection between two things or to the act of linking or
connecting them. Thereby, the term, rural-urban linkages, denotes connections between the rural
and urban societies or the acts of connecting them. Connections or linkages between the two

17
societies are caused by various factors and in different dimensions of the two societies. Let us
first identify factors causing rural-urban linkages in India.

RURAL-URBAN LINKAGES IN INDIA

In India rural-urban linkages have ever existed in cultural, political and economic dimensions.
In the traditional culture of India, the existence of the literate/ great tradition and its relation to
the little traditions in the rural setting has been highlighted by McKim Marriot (1955). The
concept of Sanskritization (Srinivas 1973), too, is a case of connection between lower and higher
cultural groups. Later, B R Chauhan’s (1970) “Towns in the Tribal Setting” and YogeshAtal’s
(1971) “Local Communities and National Politics” have illustrated the linkages between towns
and villages (Chauhan 1970, Atal 1971). Most of the studies on rural-urban connections seem to
have proceeded along channels of communication and culture. But the massive developmental
and democratization have further differentiated channels/ linkages and dimensions in the post-
Independence period of India. So, the rural-urban linkages perceived in different sectors and
sectors of social life in India are being discussed here.

SECTORS AND DIMENSIONS OF RURAL-URBAN LINKAGES:

Connections of a villager with the wider world are reflected in an immediate regional setting that
consists of both the rural and urban counterparts. The connections have both traditional and
modern elements. Based on these elements the rural-urban contacts can be seen in two broad
sectors of activity; viz., (i) traditional sector and (ii) modern sector.
The traditional links connecting the rural and the urban have existed through administrative
office, a small market and the urban pilgrim centres whereas modernized sector consists of the
activities like sale of commercial crops and purchase of valuable goods, education and health.
Furthermore, the rural-urban linkages in these two sectors can be arranged broadly along three
dimensions of life; namely, (i) cultural dimension, (ii) administrative and political dimension and
(iii) economic dimension (Chauhan 1990). Notably, revolution in information and
communication technologies and improvement in transport means in the recent decades have
further strengthened the rural-urban linkages in the modernized sector along all the dimensions.
These sectors and dimensions of rural-urban linkages are being discussed here.

Cultural Dimension:

Interconnections are found between the classical, ‘great traditions’ of the literate and the ‘little
traditions’ of the illiterate folk. These traditions are spread from the national to the regional and
to the local levels. In many cases the upper strata could provide a model of behaviour along ritual
lines to be emulated at lower levels through Sanskritization. It indicates the downward
flow of ritual behaviour and values in which a trait of great tradition undergoes devolution or
parochialization. On the other hand, a local or lowly tradition becomes wider and more
sophisticated through its upward movement or universalization. Hence, the cities reflect regional
traditions in their most sophisticated form with regard to the specialization of actors,
places and themes. The religious centres connect the city's sacred traditions, increasing
specializations among performers with the diversification among visitors or devotees. One can
see the sacred centres emerged as the meeting points of urban centres and rural hinterlands along

18
with the development of institutions like dharmshalas(inns) and professional priests. With the
improved means of communication, the density of pilgrimages has now increased along with the
further spread of rural-urban interactions as well as the agencies facilitating them. One finds
increasing use of modern technology like tractors and trolleys, twoor/ and four wheelers and
hired buses to convey people to regional pilgrimage or melacentres or to carry wedding parties.

In the celebrations of the rituals of the life-cycle, particularly marriage and death ceremonies,
the villagers arrange feasts; exchange gifts and enter into multiple interactions with the nearby
urban centres. Large villages have developed supporting centres for urban links in these matters
which facilitate rural-urban connections. In the value system of the villagers the greater urban
content in menus, gifts or entertainment at the ceremonies and in other rural ways of life has
become the symbol for status enhancement.
The rural people make use of the urban ethos in interactions; secure prestigious band of music
from towns; use appropriate film music; display fireworks; employ expert cooks from outside to
introduce certain urban varieties of dishes and invite urban guests and political leaders. Gifts to
bridegrooms include motor cycles or cars, costly wrist-watches, clothes made of synthetic fibers
and electrical gadgets like radios, fans, TV sets, refrigerators, etc. Gifts to brides include
ornaments, usually obtained from urban jewellers, saris of either silk or nylon, household
decorations including furnitures like double beds, sofa-sets, dressing tables and kitchen utensils
of stainless steel. They organize wrestling and poetic competitions and play host to dance
ordrama parties.
Communication networks emanating from the national and state capitals and other major cities
have reached the far-flung villages. Television and mobile have reached out to hitherto remote
rural areas whereas Radio has been since long an effective source of rural communication. On
the production side of television, there is some concern for including specific programmes for
farmers and certain recreational items. Radio, too, has its rural programmes, but the interests of
the rural listeners are increasingly reported to lean towards film music. The cinema has also been
a meeting point for the rural and urban people. Now, Internet has made a huge entry into the rural
areas, providing services through kiosks, dish TV or smart mobile phone.
Thus, there is a two-way traffic in mass communications; town is extending to reach the rural
populace while the latter seeks occasions to obtain urban exposure. Access to Internet seems to
be more influential in exposing the rural and urban people to each other.

Administrative and Political Dimension:

Rural-urban interactions along administrative and political dimension have a long history. A
village was defined as a revenue unit by the rulers in the past. The state made a number of
arrangements for collecting land revenues, which gave rise to the mediating roles of the Patwari,
Headman, Zamindar, Lambardar, Jagirdarand the Rajas. During the British rule in India,
Zamindars emerged as important link between the administration and the villagers. The relations
between the state and the villagers have not remained smooth. A number of tribal revolts have
been witnessed in India even preceding the struggle for Independence. The freedom struggle was
itself given a new dimension when Gandhiji recognized the poor economic position of the
villagers and their role in the national economy. Within the
Indian National Congress special attention was given to the problems of the peasants, the revival
of cottage industries and the spread of education.

19
Implementation of land reforms and community development, introduction of Panchayati Raj
and spread of party organizations from district down to village have all strengthened the rural-
urban connections. Politics has entered into the traditional groups like village, caste and family,
dividing them into factions. The mediators and brokers, mostly of political background, have
come up to provide constant linkage of the rural people with the urban centres.

Economic Dimension:

The economic relations of the villagers in the colonial past were catapulted into the arena of the
international market through the cultivation of cotton and other commercial crops like jute, tea
plantations in Assam with migrant labour drawn even from the tribal areas, and labourengaged
in construction work for railways, roads and canals. The initial growth of industries attracted
labour from areas of low agricultural productivity like eastern Uttar Pradesh and Bihar flocking
to cities like Kolkata, Ahmedabad and Bombay.
Initially,people earned income in urban centres to return to their native place on retirement or at
leisure that marked the phase of semi-permanent migration. In a sense, it halted urbanization but
it contributed to urban influence in the rural areas.
The Green Revolution and commercial crops introduced the market ethos within the rural setting
and enabled the village and the city to draw somewhat closer. The new economic enterprises
have attracted dealers of fertilizers, pesticides, advanced technology and improved seeds to the
countryside in areas of the Green Revolution. The emergence of agro-service stations has brought
modem technology to the door-steps of the farmers. New occasions
have arisen for the villagers to establish links with urban markets and administrative centres for
connections to the electricity grid installation of tube-wells, purchase ofpump sets and oil,
disposal of cane to sugar mills and grains to the market, or availing various types of loans from
the state and banking agencies. Globalization started in 1990s gave a new fillip to movement of
the educated youth in rural areas who took up various jobs in urban areas. At the same time, with
the changing life style and a growing middle class in rural areas, there is seen a greater extension
of urban facilities like electricity, water, housing, road, communication, banking, trade and
insurance agencies.
In these rural-urban linkages one could see various mediators as links connecting the rural with
the urban and vice versa. Now, we proceed to discuss the principal links connecting the rural and
the urban.

PRINCIPAL LINKS IN THE RURAL—URBAN CONTACTS

The extension of democratic and administrative order to the villages as well as the increasing
mechanization of agriculture in the wake of the Green Revolution has generated important areas
of activities. These areas are covered by principal mediators between the rural and the urban. The
new needs of the villagers in these areas appear first among the developed
sections of the villagers. But even they have to acquire the necessary skills to meet the demands
of complex, formal requirements. They try to know the unknown areas and procedures of
activities through the known individuals and networks. For this, they establish their connections
with the formal structure through the extension of the primordial ties.
The principal mediators are the rural elite and brokers working in political, legal and economic
spheres. They are tied in peculiar relationship with each other. The legal sector poses the

20
problems which need to be resolved either through an understanding between the parties or by
establishing ties with the legal and the administrative apparatus. The political leader appears in
role of problem solver. The sale and purchase of machinery like tractors require knowledge of
the markets, provision of finance and the establishment of ties with a technician middleman. In
these matters, some help of political leaders as well as kinsmen is sought. The rural elite who
have emerged through democratic decentralization at various levels of the rural politics are very
much performing the role of principal mediators as they have to keep hold on their political
constituencies. In a way, mediation offers them a constant opportunity for extending political
constituencies. The brokers are drawn generally from the workers of political parties or the
kinsmen with technical, legal or market knowledge. The brokers and the rural elites are also tied
in social, political and/ or economic relationships which increase the effectiveness
of their action. Thus, rural elite and brokers constitute the principal links connecting the
village with the town. These mediators are mainly from three spheres; namely, legal, political
and economic. The emergence of these links between the rural and urban people is attributed to
some factors that have been there since earlier times or emerging over the times.

UNITY AND DIVERSITY

India is a plural society. It is rightly characterized by its unity and diversity. A grand synthesis of
cultures, religions and languages of the people belonging to different castes and communities
has upheld its unity and cohesiveness. Inspite of several foreign invasions, Mughal rule and the
British rule, national unity and integrity have been maintained. It is this synthesis which has
made India a unique mosaic of cultures. India fought against the British Raj as one unified entity.
Foreign invasions, immigration from other parts of the world, and the existence of diverse
languages, cultures and religions have made India’s culture tolerant, on the one hand, and a
unique continuing and living culture, with its specificity and historicity, on the other.
Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Islam, Sikhism and Christianity are the major religions. There is
diversity not only in regard to racial compositions, religious and linguistic distinction but also in
patterns of living, life styles, land tenure systems, occupational pursuits, inheritance and
succession law, and practices and rites related to birth, marriage death etc.
Post-Independent India is a nation united against several odds and obstacles. The idea of unity
of India is inherent in all its historical and socio-cultural facts as well as in its cultural heritage.
India is a secular state. It has one Constitution providing guarantees for people belonging to
diverse regions, religions, cultures and languages. It covers people belonging to all socio-
economic strata. The Five Year Plans and several other developmental schemes are geared to the
upliftment of the poor and weaker sections of society.
Sources of Diversity in India:
The sources of diversity in India may be traced through a variety of ways, the most obvious being
the ethnic origins, religious, castes, tribes, languages, social customs, cultural and sub-cultural
beliefs, political philosophies and ideologies, geographical variations etc.
1. Racial Diversity:
According to A.W.Green, “A race is a large biological human grouping with a number of
distinctive, inherited characteristics which vary within a certain range.”

21
Riseley’s Racial Classification:
Sir Herbert Risely classified Indian population into seven racial types. These seven racial types
can, however be reduced to three basic races namely (1) The Dravidian (2) The Mongolian and
(3) Indo-Aryan. They are:
1. The Turko Iranian: People having this strain in their blood are mainly found in Beluchisthan
and Afghanisthan, which are now outside the political borders of India.
2. The Indo-Aryan: This strain is mainly found in East Punjab, Rajasthan and Kashmir, especially
among the people belonging to the castes of Rajput, Khatri and Jat.
3. The Scytho-Dravidian: It is a mixed racial type of Scythians and Dravidians. People having
this racial ancestry are said to be found in Saurashtra, Coorg and hilly tracts of Madhya Pradesh.
4. The Aryo-Dravidian: It is an ad-mixture of Indo-Aryan and Dravidian races. They are mainly
found in U.P and Bihar. While the Aryan element is more pronounced among the Brahmins and
other higher caste people, The Dravidian element is more prominent among the Harijans and
other lower caste people of this region.
5. The Mongolo Dravidian: This racial type formed lout of the intermixture of Dravidian and
Mongolian Races, is believed to be Brahmins and the Kayasthas of Bengal and Odisha.
6. The Mongoloid: This racial element is mainly found among the tribal people of North-East
Frontier and Assam.
7. The Dravidian: The people of South India and Madhya Pradesh are claimed to be of this stock.
Risley has not referred to the presence of Negrito element in Indian population.
Classification Haddon:
A.C.Haddon, having disagreed with the classification of Risley, has given his own classification
of races in India. According to him the principal races in India are (1) The Pre-Dravidian (2) The
Dravidian (3) The Indo- Aryan (4) The Indo-Alpine and (5) The Mongolian. He believes that
“the Dravidians may have been the original inhabitants of the valley of the Ganges in Western
Bengal and later on they settled mainly in Nagpur.”
Classification of J.H. Hutton:
J.H.Hutton, describing the racial composition of Indian population, opines that the earliest
occupants of India were probably the Negritos. However there have been little trace of them in
India today. Next came the Australoid race, which often is referred to as the Proto-Austroloid or
to the Pre-Dravidian race. Hutton believes that this race though in a mixed form, is widely spread
among the people of lower castes and lower sections of Indian society. The Australoids were
followed by an earlier birth of Mediterranian race and later by another wave of immigration of
the same race. The later immigrants were more advanced than the earlier hordes and it is believed
that they were connected with the Indus Valley Civilization.
The Mediterranian immigration was followed by another immigration of the Armenoid branch
of Alpine race. These people are credited to have developed a high standard of civilization was
flooded by a Brachycephallic race from the west and by the Southern Mongoloids, from the East,

22
later “the dolico-cephalic. Indo-Aryan race entered the Punjab about 1500 B.C.” who were
subsequently followed by a number of other immigrations.
Classification of Dr. B.S. Guha:
Dr. B.S. Guha, after having revised the earlier classifications, has presented his own list of races
that are believed to have composed the Indian population.
1. The Negrito: The presence of a Negrito substratum in Indian population is a controversial issue
among the anthropologists. The protagonists are of the view that there is an element of Negrito
race in Indian population. They claim that Negritos, even in a relatively pure form, are still found
in the Andaman Island of the Bay of Bengal. As a further evidence, it is found from certain
reports of traces of Negrito blood in the veins of some south Indian tribal people like the Kadar,
some individuals in the Rajmahal hills in Bihar, the Nagas and also some people on North-
Eastern Frontier between Assam and Burma. Keeping these facts in view, the protagonists of this
view believe that the earliest occupants of India were Negritos, who were later displaced by the
Proto-Australoids.
The opponents of this view on the other hand maintain that there is no weighty evidence to prove
conclusively the existence of Negrito element in Indian population. Whatever evidence is there
is in their view inadequate to establish the presence of Negrito element in Indian population
beyond reasonable doubt.
It may safely be said that this race even if it existed in the past, has left little trace in India today.
2. The Proto-Australoid or the Pre-Dravidian: Indian tribal population by and large is dominated
by this racial element. The mundas, the sandals, the Juangs, the Korwas, the Saras, the Parjas,
the Khonds, the Chenchus, the Irulas arte only a few of the many tribes of this stock.
3. The Mongoloid: This race came into India from North-Western China via Tibet. People having
this racial ancestry are mainly found in North-Eastern India. This race is found to consist two
fundamental types namely
(a) The Palaeo-Mongoloid: there are two sub-types of the palaeo mongoloid branch of mongoloid
race : one is the long headed type and the other is the broadheaded type.
(b) The Tibeto-Mongoloid: The people of Sikkim and Bhutan are said to the Tibeto Mongoloid
branch of mongoloid race.
4. The Mediterranian: This race is one of the dominant races in India. This race is divided into
Three types. They are:
(a) The Palaeo Mediterranian: This racial type is represented by the Tamil and Telugu Brahmins
of the South.
(b) The Mediterranian: people of this racial type are believed to be the builders of the Indus
Valley Civilization.
(c) Oriental: This race groups are very much similar to the Mediterranian racial type.
5. Western Brachycephals: This race entered India from the West. The Alpinoid, the Dinaric and
the Armenoid are three main types of this race

23
(a) Alpinoid: the people of Saurashtra, Gujarat and also Bengal are said to have this strain in their
blood.
(b) Dinaric: This strain is claimed to be found among the peoples of Odisha, Bengal and Coorg.
(c) Armenoid: the Parsees of Bombay are believed to be the true representatives of this racial
type.
6. Nordic race: people belonging to this race came to India from the North and spread all over
Northern India during the 2nd millennium B.C. At present this race is mainly found in Northern
India rather in a mixed form with the Mediterranian race. The people of this stock are believed
to have enriched Indian culture by contributing new ideas to its philosophy and literature and
also by introducing new items like horses, iron etc.
Of the 6 races, the first 3 namely the Negrito, the Proto-Australoid and the Mongoloid mainly
constitute the Indian tribal population, while the other 3 races namely the Mediterranian, the
Alpo Dinaric and the Nordic constitute the general population of India.
The above discussion makes it amply clear that the Indian population is composed of almost all
the important race of the world. The inter-mixture of races is so thorough that even in the same
family, we find one brother quite fair and the other quite dark. India is thus, a melting pot of
races. It has rightly been called as a museum of races.
2. Religious Diversity:
India is a land where almost all major religions of the world are found. Here we find Hinduism,
Islam, Christianity, Sikhism, Buddhism, Zorostrianism and Animism. All of these main religions
have a number of sects of their own.
In India, religious affiliations appear to be over-emphasised. As such, people in India some times,
seem to be more loyal to their respective religions than to their nation. This religious diversity
has been a factor and a source of disunity and disharmony in the country. As is well known, these
religious differences were responsible for the development of the two nation theory and the
consequent partition of the country in 1947. But, unfortunately the partition has neither solved
the Muslim minority problem nor it has created a homogeneous population in India from a
religious point of view.
1. Hinduism: It is an amalgamation of Indo-Aryan, Dravidian and Pre-Dravidian religious
elements. It is the religion of the majority of the people of India. The followers of Hinduism
believe in the doctrine of ‘Karma’, ‘Dharma’, rebirth, immortality of soul, renunciation and
salvation. Hinduism allows a number of possible conceptions of God. It also prescribes various
alternative paths of attaining God. The Sakta, the Shaiva, the Satnami, the Lingayat, the
Kabirpanthi, the Bramho Samaj, the Arya Samaj etc. are different sects of Hinduism.
According to 1991 census, 697.4 million people (82.6%) in India practice Hinduism and provide
a solid base for national unity through common beliefs, festivals, customs and traditions.
2. Islam: Islam the religion of the Muslims, originated in Arebia. It came to India towards the
last quarter of the 12th century A.D, with the Muslim invasions. The Muslim rulers in India
patronized it. They established long dynasties over large chunks of the country and encouraged
conversions from Hinduism and Buddhism.

24
Islam does not believe in idol worship. It professes the fatalistic acceptance of Allah’s will and
considers Prophet Mohammed as the greatest prophet. The ‘Quran’, sacred book of Islam,
ordains five primary duties of a true and devout Muslim, such as belief in God (Allah), prayers
five times a day, the giving of alms, a month’s fast every year and a pilgrimage to Mecca at least
once in the life time of a Muslim.
3. Christianity: Christians in India constitute more than 2% of its population. They are very
widely scattered all over the country, but they are mainly concentrated in the south and especially
in Kerala where they form nearly 25% of the state’s population. In the North, Christianity has
spread rather sporadically and its influence is mainly confined to certain sections of the tribal
population and the depressed castes. There are mainly three sects in Christianity. They are (a)
Roman-Syrians (b) Roman Catholics and (c) Protestants.
4. Sikhism: It was founded by Guru Nanak in the 16th century A.D. The Sikhs were originally a
part of the Vaishnava sect before they converted to it. Sikhism was later developed by a line of
Sikh Gurus, who succeeded Guru Nanak. According to Rose “ The Sikh creed involves belief in
one God, condemning the worship of other deity; it prohibits idolatry, pilgrimage to the great
shrines of Hinduism, faith in omens, charms or witchcraft; and does not recognize ceremonial
impurity at birth and death. As a social system, it abolishes caste distinctions and as a necessary
consequence, the Brahminical supremacy and usages in all ceremonies, at birth, marriage, death
and so on.”

The Sikhs are ideologically nearer to the Hindus than to the Muslims. They as a group can easily
be identified by anyone, because of the five “K”s they always wear. The 5 “K” s are Kesh (uncut
long hair), Kanga(wooden comb) Kaccha (shorts), Kara (iron bangle in the hand and Kirpan
(short sword). Sikh population in India is around 2% which is mainly concentrated in the Punjab
and at the adjoining states.
5. Buddhism: It originated in India during the 6th century B.C. Its founder was Gautama the
Buddha. Buddhism enjoyed royal patronage for a long period beginning from the Great emperor
Ashoka in the 3rd century B.C. As a result, Buddhism spread not only in India but also in
countries outside India. It has two sects, namely the Hinayana and the
Mahayana. At present Buddhists are found in Sikkim and the adjoining hills, they are also found
in Maharashtra as a result of the recent conversions under the leadership of Dr. Ambedkar.
However the number of the Buddhists in India is very meager and it represents only less than
1% of the total population.
6. Jainism: Lord Mahavir established Jainism in India in the 6th century B.C. It is very close to
Hinduism. Many of the Hindu doctrines are retained in it. Jains like the Hindus, venerate and
worship the cows, they often worship in the Hindu temples and also employ the services of the
Brahmin priest in their domestic rites. They are even more scrupulous than the Hindus in
maintaining caste distinctions. But it differs from Hinduism in its heretical views regarding the
sanctity of the Vedas and in its strict insistence on the principle of Ahimsa. Jains represent only
a small portion of the Indian population. They comprise about 0.45% of our population. Jains are
divided into 3 sects: namely (a) The Digambaras, (b) The Sevetambaras and (c) The Dhundias.
Jains are mainly urban people and are found in the town and cities of Punjab, U.P, Rajasthan,
Gujarat and Maharashtra.

25
7. Zoroastrianism or Parsi: The Parsis or the followers of Zoroaster of Zorathushtra came to India
in the 7th century A.D. from Persia in order to escape the forcible conversions to Islam. They
worship fire. The expose their dead on the so-called “towers of Silence” to be eaten up by vultures
so that the elements- earth, fire and water-are not defiled by the contact of the dead matter. Their
number in India is negligible. They are about one lakh in total half of which live in the city of
Bombay alone. As such they are mainly urban. They are the most literate and are on the top of
the economic ladder of India.
8. Animism: It is mainly a tribal faith. In India there are about 25 million people who believe in
Animism. It is a primitive religion, according to which man is believed to be surrounded by a
number of impersonal ghostly powers. These powers are said to reside in rocks, rivers, trees,
stones etc.
The above discussion makes it amply clear that India is a land of numerous religions. It is in
view of this religious diversity that independent India has declared secularism as one of the main
principles of its State Policy. Today India strives to integrate its people into a great nation on
secular lines. But in spite of the secular policy followed by the state, there have been occasional
communal riots in India causing much loss of life and property. It is to be seen how far we will
be able to cultivate the ideal of secularism in the minds of our people who are mainly religious
minded.
3. Linguistic Diversity:
India is called a ‘veritable tower of Babel’ and according to A. R. Desai, “India presents a
spectacle of Museum of tongues.” The 1971 census reports the presence of 1652 languages in
India. Most of the languages are spoken in the North India. This multiplicity of languages creates
new social cleavages in the already divided population of India by caste and creed and renders
the task of inter-communication in the country difficult, if not impossible. 10
Indian languages can, however, be grouped into four different speech families such as:(1) the
Indo-Aryan, (2) the Dravidian, (3) the Austric and (4) the Sino-Tibetan.
Hindi, Urdhu, Punjabi, Assamese, Bengali, Odia, Gujarathi, Marathi and Kashmiri belong to the
Indo-Aryan speech family. The Dravidian linguistic group includes four southern languages
namely, Tamil, Telugu, Kannada and Malayalam. The tribes of central India speak Austric
languages and the tribes of the North Eastern India speak the Sino-Tibetan languages.
At the time of Independence from the British rule in 1947, there were many princely states. The
Constitution of India was adopted on 20th November 1949 and came into effect on 26th January
1950, which defined the Union of India comprising of different states and Union territories. In
1950, the states were recognized on linguistic basis. As a result, the domiciles of a particular state
speak a particular language. Though the Constitution of India has recognized 22 major
languages, as many as 1652 languages spoken in our country. Broadly these languages belong to
three families of languages such as Indo-Aryan, Dravidian and European. Hindi, Bengali,
Marathi, Gujurati, Odia, Punjabi, Bihari, Rajasthani, Assamese, Sanskrit, Sindhi and Kashmiri
are included in the Indo-Aryan family. The Dravidian language includes Tamil, Telugu,
Malayalam and Kannada. English, Portuguese and French are included in the European language
family. Portuguese and French are mostly spoken by people in Goa and Pondicherry respectively.

26
Hindi has been accepted as the official language in India, English remains an associate language.
The 1991 census figure reveals that Hindi is spoken by 247.85 million people, followed by
Telugu which is spoken by 72.08 million, Bengali 71.78 million, Marathi 67.26 million, Urdu
and Gujurati by 46.11 million and 41.37 million people respectively. 35.32 million speaks
Malayalam, Kannada by 34.78 million, Odia by 31.79 million, Bhojpuri by 23.11 million,
Punjabi 22.41 million people and the rest of the languages are spoken by people within the range
of one million to twenty million.
Thus Linguistic diversity has posed a major threat to the unity and existence of our country.
4. Caste and Class Diversity: As a form of stratification, the caste is peculiar to the Indian society.
It may be called as an extreme form of closed class system. The status of individuals in the social
hierarchy is determined by birth. The caste system is also found in other parts of the world, but
not in a complete form as it is evinced in India. The Indian caste system is divided into the
Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas and Sudras. It is not confined to Hindus alone. We also find
castes among other communities like Muslims, Christians or Sikhs. It is believed that there are
about 3,000 castes in India, out of this one can well imagine the extent of caste diversity in India.
Every society classifies its population into different segments on the basis of occupation, wealth
or education, which are considered predominant characteristics of class. Persons belonging to
particular segment of society are pronounced as a separate class. They formulate their own values
and aspirations for the efficient functioning of their community. Stronger the class consciousness,
greater are the chances of social conflicts. In India which is also a closed society, the class
consciousness has been intensified by the pace of social and economic change and this has
threatened the old social order.
Factors Contributing to the Unity of India:
India is a vast country inhabited by people of diverse, religions, languages and customs. But,
behind all this apparent diversity, there is a fundamental unity which often eludes the eye of an
observer, who is more concerned with the external aspects only. It is these superficial observers,
who often mistakenly take the view that India, in the past, did not have cultural unity and that
whatever unity we find in India today is the product of the British rule. But, the fact is that the
ideal of unity is not something new to India. The concept of one unified India has always been
the fascinating idea of many a great thinker of this land. The idea is not imaginary either. Indian
unity is the product of certain objective factors that are present in the various fields of Indian
social life.
1. Geographical unity:

India, though very large in size, possesses geographical unity with natural boundaries. It is
surrounded on one side by the great Himalayas and on the other sides by the high seas. These
natural boundaries give the land geographical unity.
The term ‘Bharat Varsha’ i.e, India has always referred to this vast expanse of, the land expanding
from the Himalayas in the North to the Cape Comorin in the south and from the Brahmaputra in
the East to the Indus in the West. Religious thinkers, political philosophers, poets, statesmen and
kings have always conceived Bharat Varsha in this sense. Even today, Mother India means this
vast expanse of land.

27
2. Religious Unity:
India is a land of many religions. Even Hinduism is not a monolithic religion. Even Hinduism is
not a monolithic religion. There are a number of sects in it. But, despite all this religious diversity,
as Prof. Srinivas puts it, “the concept of unity of India is essentially a religious one”. Hinduism,
being the religion of the majority of the people of India, provides a basis for unity.
It is true that there are a number of sects in Hinduism. But all of them have something in common
when they preach, with slight variations, the same beliefs like immortality of the soul,
transmigration of the soul, rebirth, the law of Karma, Dharma, Moksha etc. Even Buddhism and
Jainism are not very much different from Hinduism in so far as these beliefs are concerned.
Although Hinduism admits a number of possible conceptions of God and also a variety of ways
to attain union with God, it, nevertheless, stresses the idea of unity when it declares, “there is
one, they call by many names”.
The same myths, legends and deities are shared by all the Hindus in spite of their sectarian
differences. Epics like the Ramayana, the Mahabharata and the Bhagavata are read as
devotionally in the south as in the North. All the Hindus, despite their differences in language,
caste and customs, show equal respect to the Hindu Scriptures like the Vedas, Upanishads, the
Gita and the Puranas.
Religious Unity of the country is expresses through the existence of pilgrimage centres spread
all over the country. Pilgrimage centres of great religious value such as Badrinath in the north,
Rameswaram in the south, Dwarika in the west and Puri in the east eloquently speak the religious
unity of this vast land of Bharatvarsha.
There are mountains like the Himalayas and the rivers like the Ganges, Yamuna and Godavari
which are sacred for every Hindu. These centres of religious merit, the temples, the mountains
and rivers spread all over the country make every Hindu feel that every inch of the land is sacred.
That is why, devout Hindus, even in Pre-British days, when means of transportation were little
developed. To these pilgrims language barriers, political boundaries and differences in customs
and usages were not great obstacles on their way to earn religious merit.
3. Cultural Unity:
Indian possesses cultural unity which runs through every aspect of Indian Social life. The
fundamental approaches to philosophy, art, literature and the traditions and customs are typically
Indian in character. Social institutions like caste and the joint family which are found throughout
the length and breadth of the country are typically Indian. Thus, for instance, the social institution
of caste provides a common cultural idiom to all Indians. The institution is so pervasive that it
cuts across even religious boundaries. Every Indian, whether he is a Hindu, a Muslim, a Sikh, a
Jain, a Buddhist or a Christian finds himself in a universe of caste. Similar is the case with joint
family. Then there are the same rituals, samskaras and festivals which are observed all over the
country very much in a similar fashion.
4. Political Unity:
Political unity, an offshoot of religious and cultural unity, is not something unknown to Indians.
The ideal of bringing the whole country under one central authority has always been a pre-
occupation with great kings and statesmen in India. The concept of ‘Chakravarti’ clearly refers
to this idea of political unification of India under one authority. Many kings in the past have been

28
fired by the ambition of achieving the title of Universal Overlord or ‘Chakravarti’, waged wars
and established hegemony over the entire land. In the ancient Indian literature we come across
stories referring to kings like Dilip, Sagar, Yajati, Mandhata and Yudhisthira who actually
achieved this much coveted position of being a Chakravarti. Later kings like Chandra Gupta
Maurya, Ashoka, Samudra Gupta and others also achieved this distinction of being the universal
overlord. In the past kings often declared wars on others with no other purpose than to achieve
this title. The prevalence of religious practices like the Aswamedha Yajna only indicates the
religious support extended to the idea of political unification of India under one central authority.
5. Emotional Unity:
Finally there is an emotional bond in India that binds all the inhabitants of the land. The very
name ‘Bharatamata’ brings all Indians emotionally closer to one another. The institution of
national awards and titles for acts of bravery, social service, spirit of unity concerts cut across
the communal, linguistic or regional bias and evokes the feeling of emotional unity. Emotional
integration of the people as one nation is also provided through various media like Radio, TV
and the Cinema.
The above discussion clearly shows that in India there is an under-current of unity running
through the apparent diversities of race, religion, language, custom etc. India is thus, a fine
example of unity in diversity.

29
 Quadrant-III - (Assessment)

i) Tick mark the correct answer in the following multiple choice questions.

a) Who popularised the concept of ‘village autonomy’ in India?

i) Lord Wellesley
ii) Charles Metcalfe
iii) William Bentinck
iv) None of the above

b) Identify the important social institutions in rural India among the

following.
i) Family
ii) Caste
iii) Village
iv) All of these

c) Family “jointness” in India is characterised by

i) coparcenary
ii) coresidentiality
iii) commensality
iv) all of these

d) Traditional cultural features of caste have radically changed in rural

India with regard to
i) connubial dimension
ii) commensal dimension
iii) ritual dimension
iv) none of these
:
What are the four main varnas in the Indian caste system?
A) Scholars, warriors, merchants, laborers
B) Brahmins, Kshatriyas, Vaishyas, Shudras
C) Priests, rulers, traders, untouchables
D) Elite, middle class, lower class, outcasts

Which factor contributes to the multicultural fabric of Indian society?

A) Ethnic homogeneity
B) Religious diversity
C) Linguistic uniformity
D) Caste exclusivity

How many states and union territories does India have?

A) 15 states, 5 union territories
B) 20 states, 8 union territories

30
C) 28 states, 10 union territories
D) 30 states, 6 union territories

What is the official language at the national level in India?

A) English
B) Hindi
C) Sanskrit
D) Bengali
What is a significant feature of traditional Indian family structure?
A) Nuclear families
B) Independence from extended relatives
C) Multiple generations living separately
D) Strong emphasis on extended family networks

Short-Long Answer Questions:

i) Explain the impact of the caste system on social and economic relations in India.
ii) Discuss the factors contributing to the interdependence between urban and rural areas in
India.
iii) Describe the characteristics of the 'jajmani' system and its role in traditional village life in
India.
iv) How has the power structure and leadership in Indian villages changed after gaining
independence?
v) Elaborate on the characteristics of the village community based on social organization, size,
joint family system, and the agriculture economy

31
 Quadrant-IV - (Discussion Forum)

Title: "Understanding the Dynamics of Indian Society: Caste, Village Life, and Social
Change"
In the rich tapestry of Indian society, various factors such as the caste system, religious diversity,
and the village way of life play pivotal roles in shaping the nation's cultural landscape. The
complexities arising from the interplay of tradition and modernization, rural and urban dynamics,
are both intriguing and dynamic. The caste system, with its four main varnas and the
marginalized Dalits, has deeply influenced social and economic relations. Simultaneously, the
village life, marked by joint families and the jajmani system, reflects a distinct socio-economic
structure. As India undergoes modernization and globalization, questions arise about the
resilience of traditional structures and the implications for social mobility. This forum invites
participants to discuss and share insights on the multifaceted nature of Indian society, exploring
topics such as the evolution of the caste system, the relevance of the jajmani system in
contemporary times, and the impact of modernization on rural communities.
Discuss the following:
i) Caste System and Social Mobility: How has the caste system influenced social and
economic relations in India, and what efforts have been made to address caste-based
discrimination through affirmative action policies?
ii) Village Life and the Jajmani System: Share your thoughts on the 'jajmani' system and its
role in traditional village life. How has this system evolved over time, and what factors
contribute to its weakening in modern India?
iii) Impact of Modernization: In what ways has modernization and globalization impacted
traditional social attitudes, family structures, and lifestyles, particularly in urban areas?
Are there observable changes in rural communities?
iv) Village Autonomy and Power Structure: Explore the concept of village autonomy, as
historically portrayed and in light of recent studies. How have power structures and
leadership in villages changed after gaining independence, and what factors have
influenced these changes?
v) Interdependence between Urban and Rural Areas: Discuss the intricate interdependence
between urban and rural areas in India. How do people from villages contribute to urban
economies, and vice versa? What challenges and opportunities arise from this dynamic
relationship?

32