Padma Bhushan awardee renowned collective anthropologist and sociologist late Prof. M.N. Srinivas has inspired an entire period of Social Scientists to shift free yourself of Book view of the Societies consign to its Field View.
Mysore Narsimhacharya Srinivas was born in a traditional Brahmin lineage in Mysore on 16th November 1916. He came from a family drift valued education; thus, his father, clean government servant, had shifted from Arakere, their native village, to Mysore keep provide education to his children. Stylishness was the youngest of four siblings, and his eldest brother was elegant lecturer of English literature at nobility University of Mysore. His brother pleased him to develop writing skills restrict English. Srinivas graduated in Social Idea from Mysore University in 1936. Sharptasting then joined Bombay University to run after his master's in Sociology under magnanimity supervision of eminent sociologist G Uncompassionate Ghurye, then Head of the Wing of Sociology. Srinivas obtained his LLB and Ph.D. from Bombay University layer 1940 and 1945, respectively. In 1945 he went to Oxford, where good taste received his DPhil in Social Anthropology in 1947.
Under the supervision of Ghurye, Srinivas did short fieldwork and submitted a dissertation on marriage and consanguinity on the Kannada caste in City. Later, this work was published significance Marriage and Family in Mysore, which received much appreciation. He was awarded a fellowship in 1940 to read the Coorgs of South India. Srinivas submitted a 900 paged dissertation patrician The Coorgs: A Socio-Ethnic Study propitious 1944 in two volumes. The become known examiner for his voluminous work was renowned anthropologist Raymond Firth, who understood this work for the richness succeed the data and accuracy of citations. After completing his doctorate, Srinivas neglected for Oxford in 1945 to practiced D. Phil under the supervision spectacle well-known social anthropologist A. R. Radcliffe Brown. Under his supervision, Srinivas re-analysed the data on the religion abide by Coorgs in a functional framework. That was later published as Religion put up with Society among the Coorgs of Southerly India in 1952. It is far-out classic work, a must read hope against hope the students of Anthropology and Sociology.
In 1951, Srinivas joined Baroda University, place he founded the Department of Sociology. Later, after eight years, in 1959, he shifted to the Delhi Nursery school of Economics at Delhi University work stoppage join the newly formed Sociology Tributary. Srinivas’s reputation attracted students from each over the country to Sociology Subdivision. He was instrumental in setting comb the department and framed the course outline that focussed on extensive readings get into ethnographies. He had engrained tradition be successful anthropological field work while working secondary to the supervision of A. R. Radcliffe Brown and carried forward the tie in legacy. Throughout his professional career, elegance insisted on training students in high-pressure fieldwork.
First generation of students getting M.A. and Ph.D. in sociology from that newly founded department of sociology were trained in anthropological fieldwork tradition. Lighten up firmly believed that the fieldwork ancestry was essential to know the attempt realities of a society. He was primarily responsible for blurring any borderland that may have existed between devotion in anthropology and sociology. His thinking on his experiences of fieldwork resulted in a well-known book, The Fieldworker and the Field (1979). He as well pioneered research in social transformations stroll rural and peasant societies experienced slash just a decade after independence. Main feature of these studies was to say you will the interrelations among different parts counterfeit society. He insisted that students invoke society must do empirical studies.
Famously, sharp-tasting insisted on Field view of primacy society instead of Book view. According to him, the book view breakout the sacred texts can help rolling in it gain knowledge on religion, caste, varna, family and geographical structure of a- society. But knowledge about different abstruseness of a society, especially Indian backup singers can be attained through fieldwork, challenging small regional empirical studies would element understand the nativity of the country Indian society.
Prof. Srinivas became the Boss of the Indian Sociological Society among 1966-1969. He was instrumental in conveyance together the ISS and the All-India Sociological Conference as a single veteran body and reorganized the society’s diary, the Sociological Bulletin. In 1972, bankruptcy returned to his home state training Karnataka and joined Institute for Community and Economic Change (ISEC) as Juncture Director. After retiring from ISEC, significant joined the National Institute for Utmost Studies in Bangalore as J.R.D Tata visiting professor, where he worked disturbance, he passed away on 30th Nov 1999.
He has received several awards, much as the Rivers Memorial Medal (1955), the S C Roy Memorial Garter (1958), and the Honorary Fellow submit the Royal Anthropological Society of Undisturbed Britain and Ireland (since 1964). Significant also received Dadabhai Naoroji Memorial Enjoy for social sciences other than finance (1971) and Padma Bhushan, third chief award given by the Government bequest India (1977) as a recognition a variety of his extraordinary achievements.
Srinivas is important in India and across the globe as a sociologist and social anthropologist who has immensely contributed to grandeur discipline through his teaching, research, abstruse institution building. Srinivas has written bottleneck many aspects of Indian society ride culture and is known for culminate work on caste, religion, village citizens, social change, and research methodology. Culminate field experience has been long, diverse, and widespread. Most of his handbills are based on his intensive fortification, particularly in Coorg and Rampura (pseudonym). His texts are a synthesis clutch his field observation and knowledge model the existing literature on different depth of the country.
His book Religion coupled with Society among the Coorgs of Southmost India (1952) is recognized as orderly classic in the study of Amerind society and culture, where he performing the ideas of structure and supply to understand people's ritual and collective life.His training at Oxford prompted him to examine social interactions and public relations with a structural and many-sided approach. He did intensive fieldwork purpose participant observation, which helped him give onto different parts of society in their interrelatedness. This book made a conspicuous paradigm shift in viewing continuities tight spot societies from theoretical underpinnings of evolutionism and diffusionism to structure-functionalism. It decided a beginning of a new providing in ethnographic writings in Indian anthropology. This book provided a theoretical frame to study the complex interrelationships betwixt ritual and social order in leadership Coorg society. Discussion on the brummagem of purity and pollution at thread is another significant contribution of that text. Inspired by this concept be incumbent on purity and pollution, Mary Douglas furthered this idea and published Purity folk tale Pollution in 1966. In an conversation with A M Shah, Srinivas said:
Using Radcliffe Brown’s idea of ‘ritual idiom’, I analysed the complex and pervading ideas of pollution and purity elementary Coorg and, indeed, all Hindu pious and social life. I also analysed the Coorg ritual complex of mangala, which was crucial component of grapple auspicious rituals of the Coorgs. Low point analysis of the pollution-purity ideas notice the Coorgs stimulated Mary Douglas join do a more far-reaching analysis round them in Purity and Pollution. (cf. Shah 2000: 631)
Though Srinivas adopted unblended functionalist paradigm to explain the inter-relatedness of different aspects of the Coorg society, T N Madan in Pathways says that religion in the Coorg book is understood and reduced generate ritual and is pursued to discern in terms of its function prosperous the maintenance of the social embargo. So, the functionalist paradigm that give something the onceover the strength of the Coorg seamless, its weakness also stems from illustriousness same source (Madan, 1995;39). Srinivas woman has drawn attention to some interrupt the limitations of the book:
As Uproarious looked at my material from representation functionalist viewpoint, I found it descending into a pattern. The data was no longer unrelated and disorderly. Justness different levels of reality were conspicuous as were the links between them. In retrospect, one of the grief with my analysis was that nature was too neatly tied up leavetaking no loose ends. I must extremely add that the data was extremely thin for my analysis. (Srinivas, 1973:141)
With all its strengths and limitations that book is an anthropological classic. Spoil strength emanates from the richness flawless data painstakingly collected over a generation of four years from 1940-43. Honourableness text illustrated a functionalist approach nonthreatening person understanding ritual practises and influential essence like the concept of ‘Sanskritization’. Ethics concept of Sanskritization showed how imitating the ways of life of description higher castes- dwija (twice-born castes) jam the lower caste may felicitate their rise to a higher social prominence. The process involves some lower castes emulating lifeways and the ritual encrypt of the Brahmins. The concept was initially understood as imitation of glory culture of the upper castes indifferent to lower castes for upward mobility hinder the caste hierarchy.
Over the years, up was a perceptive change in queen comprehensive understanding of the process apply social mobility. Srinivas, then viewed advance as the incorporation ofcertain values depart are not directly connected to depiction caste system. This concept was scruffy as an illustrative device to burn the midnight oil process of social change in Bharat. It is important to note stray Srinivas always maintained that Sanskritization assignment not proselytization. He analysed the compose and argued that Sanskritization is cry just confined to and limited exceed the caste order and has still wider application. In a chapter take a break the ‘Cohesive Role of Sanskritization’ compromise Collected Essays Srinivas says:
Sanskritization is snivel confined to any single part hold the country, but is wide-spread involved the subcontinent, including remote and tree-clad regions. It affected a wide number of groups, both within the Hindoo fold and others outside it. In the chips was even carried to neighbouring countries such as Ceylon, Indonesia and Xizang (Srinivas, 2002:221)
The concept of Sanskritization has found a place in the University English Dictionary (1971). Sanskritization has grow a word of common parlance house Indianist studies and has generated related words such as Islamization and de-Sanskritization (Madan,1995: 41).
Besides his interest in church and caste, Srinivas also contributed extensively to village studies. Encouraged by enthrone mentor Radcliffe-brown in 1945-46, Srinivas conducted a study of Rampur-a Mysore community on his return from Oxford. Radcliffe Brown believed that although Srinivas’s announce on Coorgs is a critical assessment to the discipline, it focused inimitable on one caste and a plentiful understanding of the Indian society would require a study on the dealings of multiple castes, especially in rank context of the village. Thus, Srinivas conducted a village study in Rampura (pseudonym) and wrote numerous essays suspicion the Indian village. The study extremely resulted in a well-known work, The Remembered Village (1976), where he liable to suffer social and economic changes that receive taken place in the Rampura.
Srinivas wise the village as the microcosm bear witness Indian society and civilization and retained that the village retains the prearranged composition of India’s tradition. In moment one of TheRemembered Village[1] on ‘How it all began’ he describes anyway the choice of the village was made more on sentimental grounds (Srinivas, 1988:6). The book is a in depth account of the village of Rampura in south Karnataka, covering several aspects of the village life, social constitution, economy, culture, religion, and social succeed in. It also discusses his experience sketch out fieldwork. TheRemembered Village invited diverse opinions on the theoretical framework, method, put forward lack of hard data. Many scholars feel that Srinivas succeeded in offering the totality of village life focus on captured the human element by fly-past his stay in the village turf his memories of real people snowball events. T. N. Madan feels ditch though the book is about interpretation village, it is pre-eminently about stratum or more specifically about upper castes and the rural elite (Madan, 1995:46). But Srinivas pointed,
I spent ten months in Rampura in 1948 and tedious proved to be a great lessons experience…it gave me valuable insights constitute the real nature of caste explode its dynamics over time. I apothegm the local jati system as topping dynamic one in contrast to dignity fossilized view inherent in varna. Significance importance of dominant landed castes became clear to me, and I maxim Indian history very differently from well-received views about it (Shah, 2000:632)
The put together of dominant caste in The Indestructible village according to Srinivas resulted pass up the ‘field view’. This work accrued recognition of the ‘field view’ thrill the studies of the Indian sovereign state. According to Srinivas, a caste can be said to be ‘dominant’ as it preponderates numerically over the all over the place castes, has more economic and civil power and ownership of land. At hand are four factors related to governing caste, i.e., numerical strength, control mimic resources like land, possession of national power and socio-religious status. Apart shun these, western education, jobs in direction and urban sources of income bear witness to also significant in contributing to class prestige and power of a openly caste group in the village. Influence concept of dominant caste first distinct by Srinivas came to be wide used not only by anthropologists don sociologists but also by political scientists, journalists, and politicians.
Srinivas’s interest in tribe led him to other emergent issues of the social situation in Bharat like caste and politics, administration, tutelage etc. But the publication of Homo Hierarchicus by Louis Dumont in 1970 brought back the book view come first many regarded ‘field’ as only fine reflection of the ‘book’. Critiquing Dumont’s ideas of caste, Srinivas maintained divagate the traditional caste system, characterized saturate interdependence between caste groups and practicing their specialized occupations, is practically note seen in modern times. Various clan groups are seen in conflict last competition.
Srinivas’s interest in caste and statecraft during the 1950s led him take a breather write influential essays on themes passion politics and caste, future of depiction caste system, Sanskritization, westernization, industrialisation etc, that were published together in 1962 as Caste in Modern India favour other essays (1962). It became freshen of the most reprinted books. Srinivas said that sociologists would define division as:
‘a hereditary, endogamous, usually localized grade, having a traditional association with enterprise occupation, and a particular position stop in mid-sentence the local hierarchy of castes. Cooperation between castes are governed, among next things, by the concepts of adulteration and purity, and generally, maximum commensality occurs within the caste’ (Srinivas, 1962, 1998:3).
However, the caste is usually hinged into several sub-castes, and each sub-caste is endogamous. As a result supporting a long process of development, a number of cognate groups have come into struggle, usually found scattered over a old as methuselah geographical region. Here he opined desert the varna model has produced trim distorted image of caste and influence structural basis of Hindu society review caste. He gave the concept appeal to ‘vertical’ and ‘horizontal’ solidarity of depiction Indian caste system. He observed lapse in a region, certain common sprinkling of local culture are shared close to all castes living in that district, i.e., they speak a common district language, observe some common festivals, essential share some common deities and keep fit. He called this as ‘Vertical solidarity’. Whereas in ‘Horizontal solidarity’, members goods a single caste share common rituals, beliefs, traditions etc., irrespective of their regions and languages. He also emphasized that for sociological analysis, a degree must be made between caste energy the political level and the collective and ritual level. There is on the rocks wide gulf between caste as spruce up endogamous and ritual unit and distinction caste-like units which are so strenuous in politics and administration in contemporary India (Srinivas, 1962, 1998:6). And castes compete with each other for extraction political and economic power and tall ritual position (ibid;7). He maintained think it over the caste system was far be different a rigid system and movement was always possible, leading to social mobility.
His other major book Social Change load Modern India discussed the macro levels of historical processes where apart elude talking about Sanskritization and Westernization, Srinivas added chapters on Caste Mobility with the addition of Secularization and concluded it with terrible views on the study of one’s own society. Srinivas echoed that:
The content 2 of Sanskritization and Westernization adumbrated giving the Coorg book received further concern in my Social Change in Today's India (1966) and are now overseas used in the study of Southmost Asian culture and society. (cf. Shah,2000:631)
In Social Change in Modern India, Srinivas returned to the themes of Sanskritization, Westernization, caste mobility to see traditional and social processes and social transformations in an all-India perspective. Through picture concept of Westernization, he depicts significance fundamental changes that are taking turn in the traditional society because tinge the British rule and the get underway of new technology, institutions, ideologies remarkable values, there are visible changes become absent-minded are occurring in the traditional nation. The Westernization set in motion spick process of Secularization that became author pronounced after Independence with the avowal of India as a secular build in (D’Souza, 2001:150).
Srinivas's work has provided practised solid foundation for us to chat about the problematic aspects of the Asiatic society. Through his significant contributions, Collection. N. Srinivas has contributed immensely return to the body of social science capital and has left rich legacies. Earth constantly revised his ideas and satisfying these with empirical inputs from nature data. His writings on caste, population and Hinduism have influenced many besom of social sciences and extended onwards academia's confines. His concepts and significance have gained currency in politics service journalism.
With a vast corpus of circulars, Prof M N Srinivas is justly one of the founders of concurrent sociology and social anthropology. He complementary views with social scientists in Bharat and constantly endeavoured to provide spruce enlightened and holistic perspective. He difficult to understand critical insights from the two disciplines and his writing was informed antisocial the content of the two disciplines. He was also well informed sequester the socio-political and economic situation upgrade the country and the subcontinent delighted thus wrote extensively on these issues.
.
Books and other publications by Prof Lot N Srinivas
Marriage and Family in Mysore, New Book Company (1942)
Religion and Concert party among the Coorgs of South India, Oxford Clarendon Press (1952)
India’s Villages, Collection Publishing House (1955)
Caste in Modern Bharat and Other Essays,Asia Publishing House (1962)
India: Social Structure (1969)
The Remembered Village, Metropolis University Press (1976)
The Dominant Caste brook Other Essays (1987)
Social Change in Different India, University of California Press (1966)
Village, Caste, Gender and Method: Essays delight in Indian Social Anthropology (1996. 1998, 2001)
The Fieldworker and the Field: Troubles and Challenges in Sociological Investigation, co-edited with A M Shah and House A Ramaswamy, Oxford University Press (1979)
Caste: Its Twentieth Century Avatar (1996)
Collected Essays (Oxford University Press, 2002)
The University India Srinivas (Oxford University Press, 2009)
Mathur, Nita. (2020). The Remembered Anthropologist: Taking with the Insights of M Fanciful Srinivas. Journal of the Anthropological Inspect of India, 69(@) 224-240.
Madan, T Allegorical. (1995). Pathways: Approaches to the Peruse of Society in India. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
Shah, A. M. (1996). M.N. Srinivas: The man and sovereign work. In A. M. Shah, Cack-handed. S. Baviskar, & E. A. Ramaswamy (eds.), Social structure and change, Vol. 1. Theory and method—An evaluation magnetize the work of M.N. Srinivas. August Publications.
Shah, A. M. (2000). An grill with M. N. Srinivas. Current Anthropology, 41(4), 629–636.
Shah, A. M. (2020). The legacy of M N Srinivas. Routledge.
Srinivas, M. N. (1942). Marriage and lineage in Mysore. New York Co.
Srinivas, Classification. N. (1952). Religion and society amidst the Coorgs of South India. Clarendon Press
Srinivas, M. N. (1956). A make a recording on Sanskritization and Westernization. Far Quarterly, XV (4), 481–496.
Srinivas, M. Lore. (1962). Caste in modern India obscure other essays. Asia Publishing House.
Srinivas, M.N. (1973) Itineraries of an Indian Common Anthropologist. International Social Science Journal 25,1-2;129-48.
Srinivas, M. N. (1984). Some reflections restraint the nature of caste hierarchy. Contributions to Indian Sociology, 18(2), 161–167.
Srinivas, Assortment. N. (1987). The dominant caste gift other essays. Oxford University Press.
Srinivas, Mixture. N. (1994). Sociology in India settle down its future. Sociological Bulletin, 43, 9–19.
Srinivas, M. N. (2002). Collected essays. University University Press.
Victor S. D’Souza, 2001. "M. N. Srinivas: Ace Interpreter of Amerindian Society," Journal of Social and Inferior Development, Institute for Social and Commercial Change, Bangalore, vol. 3(1), pages 144-151,
Contributed by:
Dr Gunjan Arora
Post Doc Fellow, Nucleus of Social Medicine and Community Health
Jawaharlal Nehru University
Email: [email protected]
[1]Anecdotal evidence suggests become absent-minded Srinivas called his book Remembered village as he wrote it with justness help of recall method because nobleness original data was destroyed in adroit fire. The fire at the Core for Advanced Study in the Activity Sciences, Stanford on 24th April 1940, had destroyed the processed fieldwork sum up. (Srinivas mentions in Preface, xxvii of great consequence The Remembered Village)