Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Mukherjee - On Village Studies in India

    Uploaded by

    Iqbal Patel
    38 views14 pages
    Mukherjee on village studies

    Original Title

    2. Mukherjee_On Village Studies in India

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Mukherjee on village studies

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    38 views14 pages

    Mukherjee - On Village Studies in India

    Uploaded by

    Iqbal Patel
    Mukherjee on village studies

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 14
    RAMKRISHNA MUKHERJEE On Village Studies in India Abstract (The tend of “vag studies in Tait from 19204 to the pent day, suegesthe existence of virally two diferent worlds of concepts and models, of anlytis and Interpretation, and of idioms of expesion sad inference wit reference to the same topic In this covet, the author is of the view that he (wo areas of anthropologinuoioigit ‘epestvely, should mee a elevant sites. Alternatively, bedges wll have to be built ‘the pices ITconfluene of he seams cannot be achcved. For, Until and ans the “economic” and “socal” perspectives meet at critical pints, it i not powible to ottain a composite understanding of vile life anda balanced view ofthe dynamics of village sce} Dr. R, Mutheree is Profesor and Head of the Department of Socioloy atthe Indian Stites! lnstiut, Coke THE deterioration in India's rural economy, set in a. century and spreading insidiously over the sub-continent because ofthe lack of ‘effective checks (Dutt 1950), came up clearly on the surface from the beginning of the peesent century. The end of the First World War unveiled the abject poverty, squalor, and disorganization of village societies: the rumblings of rural discontent began to reach the ears of the Government and the educated public in towns und cities. ‘The Government had to take a serious note of the imminent agrarian ‘riss; leading 10 the appointment of the first Royal Commission on Agriculture in 1926. Sympathetic private bodies end individuals 20 became interested, rendering 2 politcal and/or economic slant to the situation, i was in this critical phate of India's history that “lage studies”, inthe sense the label is employed today, took is birth io order that facts ‘and figures could be gathered for an objective understanding of how the rural folks live, what are their wants and why are they obliged to lead 8 sub-human existence. Contextually, the tndian National movement played a signcant role. For one ofits fruitful byesvoducts was to create interest of social Acientits in “village studies". The mass movements of 1920+, led by 2 NON. JOURNAL OF SOCIAL RESEARCH Gandhi and based essentielly on the rural question, synchronized with series of “village studies” carried out in different parts of India. Patel ‘has succinctly summarized the situation: “With the end of tbe Fit World Ws sccompasied by the eur of peasiot ito the poltial arena, a8 exemplibed doting the (Champaran and Kaira Campaigns le by Gandhij. AS a result, the cullvator ofthe sil began to attract considerable atention from students of adian society. G. Keatings land Hareld Mana io Bombay, Gilbert Sloter ia Madras, and .V. Loca i the Puoja, Initiated intensive studies of particular vilages and geoeal Agricaural problems. The teruls of thee fovestiations evoked great interest and stressed the necesty for vil forthe study.” (Patel 1882: 0 In 1930-5, many more stientsts, administrator ed social workers joined forces. “Village studies ‘out extensively all over India by organizations anc the beginning of an agrarian css was and politically imbu- began tobe carried ividvals. ‘The Punjab Bosrd of Economic Enquiry went on organizing village surveys conducted by individual workers (since 1920). The Bengal Board of Economic Enquiry was set up and it undertook village surveys (1935); some in collaboration with the Indian Statistical Institute, Calcutta (Coakravacti 1937), Tagore’s Visve-Bharati organized. village surveys round Santiiketan, Bengal, under the auspices of the Visva-Oharati Rural Reconstruction Board and at the individual initiative of Sei Kali Moan Ghosh (data party processed in Mukherjee and Mukherjee 1946; Mokherjee 1957; d.). Professors Bhattacharya and Natesan of Scottish Church College, Calcutta, published accounts of village life in Bengal as collected by their students from respective vllages(1932). The same was done by Professors Thomas and Ramakrishoan of Madras University (1940) with reference to the south Indiao villages previously surveyed under the guidance of Gilbert Slater. The Cochin State published accounts of individual villages under the authorship of T.K. Sankara Menon (1935) Subramanian published the survey of a south Indian village under the auspices of the Congress Economic and Political Studies (1936). Gujarat Vidyapeeth persuaded Professor J.C. Kumarsppe to undertakethe surveyof Matar Taluka in Gujerat (1931); and his work synchronized or was followed. by those of G.C. Mukhiyar (1930), J. B. Shukla (1937), and others in Gujarat, Village surveys were also taken up in Maharashirn by the Gothile Institute of Politics ond Economies, Poona (Gadgil and Gadgil 1940, and cotbers) And so it went on with studies undertaken by organizations and by individuals themselves ‘Sigoificanly, for these studies the field under focus was the economic life of the people; so that the pressing problems of rural society could be ‘exposed in bold relief. Slater, one of the pioneers in Todia, wrote in his introduction to the study of ages came before towos, and oven lathe mot Industrialized couateley, where st economie questions tad to be studied from an urbe pot of view itis well to be Teovinded that tbe economic Mle of 4 towa ot cy canaot be understood without (ON VILLAGE STUDIES 18 INDUA 3 ‘reference to the lands which send it food and maw eotrial, and the villages fom which it altri young men and women. The inyoraace of rural activites and of village life a India, In view of the enormous prepondernce of ks agriolurel population ‘over thal engaged in ining. manufacture, commerce and ianapert ik not Ukely to be ‘overiooked; and lest of all in Southern Fadi, which baa no col mines and no great indus ike cation ownutactre in Bombay and jute in Beogal" (Slater 1916: 1). Mann wrote in the Preface to his second study of a Deccan village, “The udy of rural conditlons by cloe inquiry Inte te cicumtances of «slope soit, bei willag, pari, or ental, hascome to the front prominent in feeot yeas 48 ‘method of til and economic investigation. And by the ue of this method ifthe willages tobe studied are well chosen. very much more intimate acqualoee wit the ‘al conditiaas of if than by why other method can be obialced." (Mana sod anna 182: i, Kalelkar wrote in bis introduetion to J.C. Kumarappa's ‘mic Survey of Matar Taluka”: if here sone thing that characterises the educated aaa conditions ia his own country. There ae some people who are anxious 10 se Todia industriline, There others are who willbe conent if Todi got back her ows. But ‘citer of them have secured the Bed rock of statistics collet from the mouths ofthe peatants themselves, The present survey is unigae in his respect. (Kurarappe 193: Wi. Economics and material welbeing ofthe rural folks bed thus become the preoccupation with those undertaking “village studies,” as the situation then dictated. Tn 1940-5 also the orientation of social scientists towards “village studies” remained virtually the same as before, Only it could be noticed that henceforth they began to launch extensive enquiries by covering large tracts in the light of the picture of rural society already built up by means ‘of the ever-increasing numbers of isolated “village studies". Concurrently, they were often found to concentrate on specific aspects ofthe “rural problem” in x pactiular ares. ‘Thus the Indian Statisticel Institute, Calcutta, undertook ries of sample survey of Bengal villages in order to. ascertain the effects of the 1943 famine on rural society (Mahalanobis er a! 1946; to estimate the extent of rural indebiedness or to portray the condition of sgricultoral labourers in society (Indian Statistics! Institute 1948); and s0 on. Other organizations also made similar attempts, the details of which are not of immediate concern (eg, Iyenger 1951). Likewise, the Government Departments, Central and Provincia undertook extensive studies; such as the Agricultural Labour Enquiry of the Ministry of Labour, Government of India, since 1948 (published from 1954 onwards). And individuals elso contributed their mite io this venture. For example, Sayana of the Bombay School of Economics and Sociology undertook sample survey of Telegu-speaking districts of the Madras Province, along with the collstion of relevant data from officiel and non- ‘oficial sources, in order to study the “Agrarian Problem of Madras Proviace” (Sayene 1949), 4 INDIAN JOURNAL OF SOCTAL RESEARCH The upsbot was that by 1950 the minimum of basic knowledge had been accumulated, at any rate, to attempt estimating the national income ‘of rural India with reasonable precision, to forroulate plans and program mes for India's rural development, and to sponsor studies on en all-tndia teale forthe planned development of India in the futue, This is evident form the reports of the National Tacome Committee set up by the Government of India in 1949 (eg., The First Report 1951), from the precise formulations of rural economic problems in the plans propagated by the Government of India or private bodies, from the suguration ofthe Goverament of India National Sample Survey in 1950 (viz. General Report No. 1, 1952), ee, ete. This course of development and outcome of “wvillage studies” meets evidently en imporiant need of the country and the goverament. So it say not be fortuitous that from a differeot ulterior motive it was brooghe ‘yp by the Brith East fadia Company ax early asin 1689, ‘Those were tbe days ween the Directors of the Company were ‘becoming interested in controling land and people in India instead of indulging in mere trading activities along with contemporary European ‘and Indian rivals. Pursusntly, they wrote (o their agents io India: “Toe ietete of our revenue isthe subject ofr car, a mach a8 out tide — ‘tx that mast mantaia out force, whea twesty accidents may nterrapt out trade; Me that must make ws «ston in foia—wvithout that we at but aba great umber of Interiopers, united by his Majeny's royal hare, fit oy to ade where nobody of power thinks i their interest to prevent wand upoe his account itis that the wise Dutch, ia all their general avis which we have sen, wie en pararaphs concerning their government, hei civil and. miliary poli, wattre, and the increase of tei revenue or one parauraph they wie coocerueg rads (Quoted by Mil 18: 87. To the present context, the aspirations of the East India Company for political power over India, as narrated elsewhere (Mukherjee 1958 a), ‘do not concern us, What, bowever, would be of ioterest 10 note is that Aer the futile attempr of the Company inthis direction at the end ofthe seventeenth century the sveessful attempts made since the middle of the cighteenth were followed by increasing awareness of the foreign power o know more and more about life and living in the sub-continent, Because, {or good or bad, for the welfare ofthe people or for the exploitation ofthe ‘masses, it is nevesary to know at the outset how the society is organized ‘and how the people live. Hee, therefore, we need not dwell upon the policy which sponsored from the beginning of the nineteenth century the extensive (although sketchy) collection of information on how the Indian people live ia villages. Such as the Company's requisition of the services of Dr. Francis Buchanan from 1800 ia order to report on the conditions in towns and villages in Madras, Mysore, Biba, Bengal, ec, (Buchanen-Hemilton 1807). (ON VILLAGE STUDIES IN INDIA 5 We need not also refer to the genvine interest in the welfare ofthe people which prompted a number of forcign administrators and scieatsts to undertake relevant investigations in villages and in brotder regions, ‘mainly from the beginning ofthe twentetb century. Such as tbe study of * British administrator ia India on the economic life of a Bengal distict (Faridpury in the fist decade of the present century which be undertook on bis own initiative and as labour of love (Jack 1916), What we must note, instead, is that infrequent and usualy 2 genera- lized version ofthe situation as they were, these effors built the monumen- tal gate-way to the path of development of “viflage studies” in India The path, however, cemainad oatrow and not yet fully reinforced even after several decades of conducting in all these days engrossing atiention was showered on rural “economics.” ‘change i che depth of focus ofthe pictures emerging from the ivestga- tions was therefore called for. Namely, to the pioneers in the feld the individuals and the social sroups were living entities with teference to the economic activites they ‘were engaged in, The insitutional approach, inthe sense it endeavours to portray the “‘orgunized, purpose(ul system of humen effort and acbieve- ment" (Matinowski 1944: 51), was possibly not deliberate. It was spontaneous as one eight expect in unsophisticated Keen observers, But in the course of development of “village studies” duriog 1920-50 the ‘emphasis was lid increasingly on purely economic categorization of rural society; and even the social relations which the villagers had evolved witb reference to theis economic organization were not attended to properly or atall, Such asthe numberof guifully occupied persons io a village, their afllation to respective sectors of the ational economy (as agriculture, handicraft production, etc), the type of job they performed (such as non- rmanutl or skilled manual occupation, et.), and their activity status (es employer, employee, own-account worker) wete the usval subject-matter for analysis, But the bearing ofthe presence of these individuals in society in terms ofthe relations which had emerged among themselves on account ‘of their work and earnings, the relations which had crystlized within tnd between the societal groups incorporating oae or the other ofthese persons, and such other facets of social relatioes evolving out of the ‘econvmmie organization of society were hardly touched upon, Or, the income distribution, fandbolding, the expenditure pattern, ‘and such otber economic eiributes ofthe villagers were often treated in meticulous details; Sut the social relations the rual folks had developed with respec 0 sueb economic attributes were, almost invariably, lst sight ‘of, Similar examples may be cited in numbers, ‘Asa result, even in terms of only such organized, purposeful sys- teat of human effort and achievement as refer to the economic sphere of Society aot enough bss been learnt so far as how the relevant individual, 6 INDIAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL RESEARCH the co-esident and commensal kingroups (vit, residential fmily-unia, the ingroups of large dimensions, or other varieties of societal unis terized by the iavoluotary end voluotary groupings of the vl integrated wits ove anotber wit refereace tothe economic applltions of ‘heir constituent members, Iadeed, we kaow very litle today about tbe structural and functional sligaeacats ia village society consequent to the economic activities ofthe ‘people, not (0 speak of other aspects of their life. For the preoccupation ofthe social seictists with the “economics” of rural society, which became tore and more proaounced since 1940s, began fo push the living persons inthe background; and instead of preating.the villagers as soc! beings presented them (with increasiagly Baer precision no doubt) as abstract ‘economic and statistic categories. m To be sure, there was, there is, and there will remain the need for such specialized studies. But equally, it began to be felt, there isthe need {0 take up “willage studies” from another perspective: the perspective ormulsted and interpreted by cultural and social anthropologists and sociologists in contradistinction to that evolved by the economists from an eatler period. This felt-nced began to be satisfed by the publications coming out since 1950-s, The late Professor Majumdar, one of those who undertook the task, had aptly described the situation. ~OF ine, India we have spate of iterate on oor rural e.. Some have been ‘writes by forlap scholars, some by Indians. Some of these studies ave been ‘monograph oriented, as for example, Sivas "Myre Village or Dbe's ‘indian Vilage’. Some are prem oreated, as one dicovers io the vious anthoogts, Doblistd i ot sca science journals athe Ezaamic Worl The We ‘Beagal Goveroment hs published a volume of ettyon Indian veg life and problems ‘died by MIN. Srinivas. Moki Marriot bas edited a eis of artes on India rl ie, wade be the Ethoogephi and Folk Colure Society, “Uitar Pradesh, has pubihed a volume on Aual Profs, theft ofa serie of vilage ware akg in ee asignent ae inmate, inesive and competent, some are superical nd ‘no doubt, some have raised our expectations, for thay have focused ateton of the soany probes of rua life which demand pray in the contest of the plenning for ‘the couatride, whichis the avowed go of our planer.” (Majumdar 1958: 32632). It isnot the cootention of the writer to comment on the writiogs of sis and sociolognts who have thus given a new look Obviously, at the iai of such w veature there would be some basty generalizations, oceasionally narrow specializt- joa, or, infrequently, dogmatic adherence 10 an intriguing concept. But these are minor blemishes on the edifice thet in being built by this attempr fo edifice which will serve the purpote of presenting, eventually, « balanc- ed view of the forces at work ia rural society and e harmonious picture of tbe course of life pulsating therein, (OW VILLAGE STUDIES IN INDUA 1 1 thus comment on the lack of a balanced view of the dyaamics of tural society and on the incomplete picture of rural life we are presented with even afler this new venture, And I nole, concurrently, that this will have 10 be achieved. There isan important reason for subscribing {0 this viewpoint. ‘Namely, although most of the studies falling under the recently sponsored scheme are of substantial worth, they swing to specialization similar to those of contemporary economists but at the otber extreme, The twain do not meet. Or they meet seldom, and there again in most instances inconsequentially. A composite picture of rural society has, therefore, yet to be exposed Thus, with reference to the same subject as “village study”, an economist may be found to dvell_on the theme of “protearianization” of the mass villagers as indicative of the dominant phenomenon in rural society. Whereas a social anthropologist or sociologist would be commpli- rmentarily conceateating his attention on the role of dominant casein a village, on castelzation or sanskritiztion of the rural folk, ete. Isthere a link between the two processes or are they independent of each other ? And if link is there, what does it stand for vis-e-vis the dynamics of rural society ? Would it not be useful to explore that link for a harmonious picture of the life pulsating in a village ? In the same way as for the above example, with respect to village fan entity the economist may speak of “closed” versus “‘vulnerable” economy and elucidate the concept by pointing out “sub-marginal” productive and service enterpriser in a “self-ubssting economy". The Jal anthropologist or sociologist, on the other hand, may ieat the village sa unit hlerarchicolly siructured and may elucidate rural life as a “con- ‘cept based on kinship ties, caste-wise integration, and the jajmani system. But is it oot possible to combine the two aspects of rural society and obtain thereby a fuller understanding of the course of life therein ? Similarly, an economist interested inthe socal accounting of «village may discuss the problem of evalustion of “non-monetary income and ‘outgoings in farily-houschold enterprises” while social anthropologist for sociologist who considers the village as a “constellation of values” may elaborate on the particular value system of rural folks, on the concepts of porochialization versus universalizetion, ee, But, agtin, would not the superimposition ofthese two facets of rural life yield» better harvest ? Or, both being concerned with explaining current changes in village society, an economist my point out the growing phenomenon of entre- preneurship in rural areas and the emergence of a class in village society with improved means and techniques of production and distribution, ete, Whereas social anthropologist or sociologist may describe the content of the “urbanization process” in cural areas against the schematic for- mulation of ‘rwal-urban continuum and may ascertain the role of “village 8 INDIAN. JOURNAL OF SOCIAL RESEARCH lite” in that context. But there, agsin, it may be desirable to bring. the two sets of phenomena in focus siultsneovsly so as to appreciate the crucial character of the emergent leadership in rural society, Many more instances conid be cited 10 illustrate how even the complimeatary aspects of village life are empbasized unilaterally by the economists and the social anthropologists or sociologists ia two diferent directions, without attempts being made to link up the two equally useful lines of study. And, theo, there are obviously such other aspects of village Iie fall under the respective Belds of specialization of an economist, a social anthropologist or a sociologist. ‘The uprhot is tht today we encounter, virtually, two differeat workés of concepts and models, of analysis and interpretation, and of idioms of expression und inference concerning the same topic asvllage_ study.” W No doubt tbe seperation and the current parallel development of ‘bese two perspectives in “village study” substantiate the fact that this branch of study has passed its stage of adokscence and has attained sdulthood, So that tbe social investigetion of villages may be conducted ‘nits own merit as already accorded 10 the economic investigation of ihe same. For, on the one hand, both would enrich our knowledge of the social organism vader reference, and, on the other, there are certain distinctly important nvances of life and living in a village which can be elicited by only one ofthe two approaches respectively, ‘Taus, when describing the economic structure ofa village, Dube ‘concentrates his attention onthe relation between the caste-aflistion and: the occupation of respective villagers (Dube 1955: 571). Thereby he certainly departs from the no less useful procedure followed by economists; such asthe relation between land ownership/uilization and occupation of the same villagers, their activity status with reference to different sectors ‘of the national economy, ete. But the pilure Dube presenis by following his line of analysis is an addition to our store of ‘knowledge regarding village societies which was lacking in the picture presented by economists, although some of ‘them may have noted the caste afiliation of villagers as merely one of tbe many ways of classifying village soccty or may have sentioned in passing the association of some castes with criain facets of its evonomic organization Alto, while noting es above the viility of “village studies" by socal stbropologists or sociologists, we may comrsent on the usefulness of ex: posing by means of relevant conceptue! tools the specitally social characteristics of village society, Such asthe relative position ofa village io the spectrom of rural-urban continuum; or be working of « particular process of acculturation in rural society under the labels of sanskitizaion, parechializtion, etc; and 400. ‘And, concurrently, we may pote the dstiact importance of portraying (ON VILLAGE STUDIES IN INDIA 9 the peculiar and specific way of Wfe of & village, as Rosser has dose for instance (Rosser 1960: 77-89). Briefly, therefore, there iso ground to denounce, or even underaine, the intrinsic’ merit of “village studies” usually conducted by social anthropologists and sociologists. But, all the seme, the point remains that the wo streams of "village studies” carrying the imprint of economists ‘or socal anthtopologists/sociologsts, respectively, must meet at relevant sites, Alternatively, bridges will have to be built at the places if confvence ofthe streams cannot be achieved. For it is the cavsal or concomitant relations among economic and social (including ideological) traits of a people which lead to the emergence of specifc societal organizations and the formulation of dstnet ideological ‘orientations of their constiment members. Alo these are the relations which either maintain the current strocturel and functional alignments ia society or engineer their respective courses of change or transformation, So that, until and unless the “economic” and “social” perspectives towards ‘village studies meet at critical points, it is not possible o obtain & composite understanding of village life and a balanced view of the dynamics of village society Evidently, the demand may not be met ia a single study unless it is an omnibus one. For we find that, justifiably, specialized studies in the economic or the social field call for respective volumes, Pursuantly, specialized investigations in the above respect also should ‘be included in the curiculum for “village studies". v ‘The sim, thus outlined, is not of mere academic interest to one with 4 squeamish ast fr the foal knowledge. This is also not tbe. means 10 feed a docteinaire because of bis preoccupation with the finding of so- called “economic motivation to each and every societal manifestation. On the conteary, it has a. distinct usefulness. Because it mets one ofthe imperative requisites to appreciate the governing processes within a social organism by the crossfertilization of the “economic” and the “social” factors instead of depending apon the subjective assumptions and inter- pretations of eiber of the two schools of social ssientsts to film the gop inthis respect. Moreover, the need for such an attempt is underlined ia the context of our presentday situation, as Professor Firth bad noted very forcefully more than # decade. “Indias beiasog to learn te lesoa tat the pie of politcal feedom is coeo- ine reiponiiy. The sympa exteaded to her ia her seul for independence & feded in manifold measre now, in her suogge to abate the gtintng rr poverty of 0 mary of her people. Itcan hardly be deied that some solution of the oreiog auztan problem of India is rocil 1 he survival of ber present pole system, More tha ta, i irl 0 the survive of many of hr cen ‘Most ofthe Books and arteles about tbe agrarian problerw of Toda tha reich 10 INDIAN JOURNAL OF SOCUAL RESEARCH the Western reader are ants of ener kad, They tll us of Tdia—and eave ws bith a fcingofgnranc 1 jut Now these problems fet erent groups and clases of the ponte io i ‘hoe soil efiareats aod soca values which give the economic system. is meaning (OF they talk tbout the socal Bacaround a somehiog which simply inhibi the development of fea ecooomicesteptise and eficieney—in terms of caste taboos ard ‘cted cows and sited monkeyi—and leave otouched the slid satiation 0 be {ound i the fly 486 kiship syste ia the complex rial evaluations of ‘eles obo the die spin.” In the light of our achievements til today ss regards the motivation {o change in tural society, the words of Professor Firth rng a topical note, For, even after half a century's efforts to understand and appreciete village life in Indie, we ate oot certin, as. yet, as to which are the soft spots ia the socist organism through which a dested course of change could be introduced io rural society (Mukherjee 1962). For instance: is it the “‘proleterianized” rural mass andjor the rumercaly “dominant caste” placed low in the caste hierareby whichis tobe the barbinger of anew iife in villages? Alternatively, would the charge devolve upon the landed gentry andjor the top-ranking Caste Hindus? Likewise, would the carriers of new valves to rurah society be the ‘growing “rural intelligentsia” ot the dumb millions who have their “education” in the hard way ? And should we go on considering. similarly, other distnetly “social” andfor dstinely “economic” groups in society in order to unravel the course of change therein ? Or, instead of such formal and mutualy distinct econmic and soca) ‘categorizations ofthe rual folk, is ita symbiosis oftheir various economic and social attributes which should lead us tothe diagnosis of relevant soft spots in the social organism under reference ? Evidently, io consideration of is theoretical value as well as is practical implications, a course of research in this dceetion has been called for since & long time. But, falling in no-man’s land between “economics” 1and “social anthropology’ or sociology" as two different ds study its progress has been baltiog and hesitating. So in tis line bave been very ite so far; in quantity at any rate From among the economists, possibly the invest Bhattachorjee (1958) and of Baljit Singh (1961) stand out in this respect. From the other side, A.C. Mayer's Land and Society in Molaber (1952) falls in she fine; his Caste and Kinship in Central India (1960) is sho oot ‘ut of the path. Six Villoges of Bengal, surveyed during 1941-45 and published as late asin 1958, was also s feeble venture of the present writer in this feld; leading him at e later date to discuss The Dynomes ofa Rural Society (1957). F.G. Bailey's Caste and the Economic Frontier (1958) isa distinct cooteibution in the seme fed; and bis explorations in the ‘wider field of Tribe, Coste, ond Nevion (1960) follow therefrom. (ON VBLAGE STUDIES IN INDIA n Contextually it should be noted that some studies of social scientists in East Pakistan (formerly a part of the Todian sub-cootinen) also give the indication of a similar orientation. Such as of Husain as an economist (HHussin 1956), and of some socal anthropologists as found in te volume ‘Sociol Reseorch in East Pokiston edited by Pierre Besssignet (196). ‘Thus, irespectve ofthe relative merits of these studies, we find that aitempts bave been made in the desired direction in the astten or twelve years, But such studies reroin intermittent and relatively scarce. Sbould ‘we oot therefore, uodertake more such studies; ad with, possibly, poiated selevance ? uw ‘The question may be raised at this stage of our discussion as to which of the two schools of specelst, viz. economists and social anthro pologists or sociologists, should undertake the task. This is « moot question, But it is also a questoo that we are facing frequently these days on other courses of social research because of the significant development of different disciplines of study under the banner fof social scicaces. And so a quick answer may be provided as that inter-

    You might also like