Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

It is crucial to make a distinction between the word Sanskritization and its conceptualization as a tool of sociological analysis. The word itself, having been derived from the root “Sanskrit,” labeled the sacred language of Hindus and Hinduism, together with related terminology such as “Sanskritic,” “Sanskritized,” and “Sanskritizing,” is already present in nineteenth- and twentieth-century European Indological literature. These terms are used variously, but predominantly describe either elite-based, Brahmanic, “Hindu” culture or note its influence on the diverse, non-Brahmanic, non-Hindu elements of Indian society. As a point of historical interest, it is notable that although the conceptualization of the term is rightly attributed to the late eminent Indian social anthropologist M. N. Srinivas, it (and associated descriptions) was already in use by sociologist, historian, and economist Benoy Kumar Sarkar in the 1930s and by linguist Suniti Kumar Chatterjee in 1950. As formulated by Srinivas, the word Sanskritization sometimes connotes a perspective, a theory, a concept or a cluster of concepts, all relevant for theorizing social change in India and firmly embedded in an anthropological model of Indian society. The concept has had a checkered history, but is probably the single most important contribution to social science scholarship from India, and a good candidate for the title ... log in or subscribe to read full text