Paper 2

Perspective in study of Indian society

1. Indological perspective – G S Ghurye
2. The structural functional perspective- M.N Sreenivas
3. Marxist perspective- AR Desai
Understanding Indian society has been a complex exercise right from the
beginning of sociology as a discipline in India, during 1920s. The complexity
of Indian society represent itself in terms of a number of paradoxes. These
paradoxes include various dichotomies like
tradition VS modernity,
change Vs continuity,
culture Vs structure
fact Vs value.
These paradoxes permeates through each and every sphere of social life
causing a problem in developing a clear view of Indian society.
Although information about Indian society is contained in ancient and
medieval scriptures but conscious attempt to understand Indian society and
culture were made after the establishment of politico administrative rule by
the British. After 1760s the British administrators were given
responsibilities for developing such understanding. This practise continued
up till 1850s. During this an orthodox view of Indian society was generated
to suit the colonial interest. The society was understood in terms of self
sufficient villages (static and unchanging), castes, a primitive political
system and the joint family.
After 1850s the British rule in India had extended to the whole country and
India came under the direct control of British government. New efforts
were made by the British government for developing a view of Indian
society by sending academicians like anthropologist, theologist and other
writers. Christian missionaries also played a significant role in the whole
process. Towards the end of 19th century a larger number of educated
Indians contributed towards developing a more realistic understanding.
Specific books were written on different aspects of Indian society like books
on caste, joint families, jajmani system, Panchayats etc.

ZIAIAS_9790892697[Type text] Page 1

 Thus up till 1920s, reliance was more on the textual sources of
understanding Indian society. Although a large number of translations
done by Europeans helped in identifying the cultural institutions followed
by people. After 1920s theoretical perspectives were used to understand
Indian society.
Eg: G.S Ghurye used other perspective along with indology to develop a
modern indological approach. Thus up till 1947, indological perspective
remained dominant, but was combined with other theoretical perspective
to develop a more realistic view. After 1947, sociology was extended to
different universities which resulted in gradual expansion of theoretical
perspective to study Indian society. The newly established welfare state
required realistic and factual view of Indian society for the purpose of
planning. This resulted in the use of a field view. To study Indian society a
large number of village studies were conducted and various perspective
like structural functionalism by M.N Sreenivas, statistical positivism by IP
Desai, Marxist perspective by A.R Desai were used to interpret the data
and draw conclusions. Apart from this other approaches used were the
psycho analytical views, structural historical approach, culturological
approach, philosophical view and institutional approach etc.

Sociology as a discipline in India

Sociology in India was introduced by Sir Patrick Geddes in 1919 in the
Bombay University. In Lucknow University it was taught by Radha Kamal
Mukherjee in 1921. In Bombay University Geddes was succeeded by GS
Ghurye in 1924. After that up till independence Ghurye was mainly
responsible for expansion of sociology in India. Up till independence
sociology was taught mainly along with other discipline which led to a trend
towards use of combination of sociological perspectives with other
perspectives. After independence sociology witnessed tremendous
expansion and separate department of sociology were introduced in many
universities.

ZIAIAS_9790892697[Type text] Page 2

 Indological Perspective
Indology literally means the systematic study of Indian society and culture.
It is the initial perspective to study Indian society. The task of indological
perspective is to interpret and understand Indian society on the basis of
traditional Indian religious text. Ancient legal and historical documents,
archaeological evidence and other literary works. The religious textbooks
like Ramayana Mahabharata and Vedas etc, historical text like Kautilya’s
Artashastra various travelogues, writings by Kings, archaeological sites
including inscriptions, pillars, monuments etc have been used by the
indologist to develop their understanding of Indian society.
Indological studies comprises of studying language, ideals, beliefs, customs
etc within the broad purview of culture specific to Indian society. Thus
culture is the central instrument through which an understanding of Indian
society was developed. In this way, various aspects of Indian society like
religion, caste, family, jajmani system, Panchayat etc were seen from a
cultural angle and accordingly a view of Indian society were generated
without taking into consideration the variations in the actual reality..
Indological perspective is based on the following assumptions.
1. It assumes the uniqueness of Indian civilisation and society and
claimed that Indian society can only be understood with their
concepts and theory particular to Indian society. The western
concepts and theories cannot be applied to Indian society.
2. The emphasis is more on developing an understanding rather than
suggesting solution to the problem
3. Indologist attempted to understand society in terms of historical
moorings that is in terms of its continuity from the past. Thus
historical understanding is integrated with the indological studies
4. Indologist refrain from using different field view on account of
innumerable variations and heterogeneities existing in Indian
society.
Indological perspective has gradually developed after the middle of 18th
century and broadly it is understood in two types

ZIAIAS_9790892697[Type text] Page 3

 1. Classical indological perspective
Indology before 1920s has been referred to as classical indologies Thus in this
perspective, understanding was purely based on religious text using sanskrit
and other language sources. The initial emphasis of indology was on
translation of religious text. William John established Asiatic Society of
Bengal in 1784 which emerged as a major centre of indology.
Max Muller’s ‘ Sacred books of East’ became a major source of information as
it contained translation of important religious text.
After the middle of 19th century Sir Henry Maine’s Ancient law in 1861 and
Village communities in the East and West 1871 were considered as references
for indological studies. Initially the indologist were mainly British officials or
other western scholars. But towards the end of 19th century number of Indian
indologists started various schools of indology like theosophical Society of
Oriental Research Institute 1891, Oriental Institute of Baroda 1893, Bhandarkar
Institute of Pune 1917 broadly western scholars had an Orthodox and
sometimes critical view of Indian society. The Indian indologist emphasis on
uniqueness and the glorious past.

2. Modern Indology
After 1919 with the establishment of sociology as a discipline the classical
indologist school was modified into a more rational and academic perspective.
GS Ghurye considered as the father of modern indology. (Social indology or
sociological indology)
Modern Indological perspective have mainly two strands
1. Now this perspective was used by academicians who are trained in the
particular disciplines rather than officials or literary experts
2. Indology was used along with other theoretical perspective which
made it more rational.
eg: G.S Ghurye employed a synthesis of classical indology, and
anthropology and a diffussionist approach.
DP Mukherjee combined it with Marxian framework to develop a
Marxological approach. Radha Kamal Mukherjee employed a synthesis
of classical indology and empirical sociology.

ZIAIAS_9790892697[Type text] Page 4

 Even after 1947 indology continued to be used as a source of historical
information about Indian society but its emphasis kept on reducing with
a gradual increase in the use of field view.
Eg:Even MN sreenivas used indological perspective to supplement his
fieldwork along with the structural functional perspective. It was used
later on by different sociologist to reinforce their fieldwork.

Criticism of indology
Thus the contribution of this perspective in developing an initial understanding
of society cannot be ignored but still after independence indology lost its
relevance on account of following reasons:
• Indology could not fully explain the empirical reality as there was
always a gap between normative order which was drawn from the text
and the actual structure which was seen in the reality.
Eg:MN Srinivas view of dominant caste in 1940s was highly incompatible
with Indological understanding of caste.
• Contradictory information in various indological concepts induced
subjectivity in the analysis. A number of different assumptions emerged
on the basis of different religious texts leading to development of
contradictory indological schools.
eg:There was no consensus on the status of women in Indian society
• The authenticity of the religious scriptures and the other sources were
questionable. There were no means of judging the reliability of the
information. eg: The textbooks portrait a solidaristic, cooperative and
harmonious picture of Indian villages and never took into account the
exploitative nature of caste system and jajmani system.
• Particularly earlier indologist and the indological studies have been
accused of biased by the colonial interest. They refer to the selective
text to develop an Orthodox and backward view of Indian society.
Similarly the initial Indian indologist were biased for their nationalist
interest. Therefore the classical indology could not develop an
objective view.

ZIAIAS_9790892697[Type text] Page 5

ZIAIAS_9790892697[Type text] Page 6