Submitted by: Praveen Mukati 141109029Subject : Settlement sociology

Morphology of Rural Settlements in India

Settlement morphology is primarily concerned with the lay-out, plan and internal structure of the settlements.  

It not only views settled area in terms of physical space but identifies its various components in respect of socio-economic space which has its direct bearing in controlling the arrangement of buildings, patterns of streets and fields and func tional characteristics of settlements in general.

it helps in understanding the socio-cultural structure of the villages, their eco nomic and sanitary conditions as well as their re sponse to new innovations

SETTLEMENT MORPHOLOGY

(a) ground plan(b) built-up area  -The ground plan mainly includes street patterns,

arrangement of buildings and cultural artifacts like temple, fort, residence of village and market place etc, process of change is comparatively slow.

  -Built-up area undergoes frequent changes. Doxiadis has identi fied four main parts within the

morphological struc ture of a settlement. These include : (a) homogeneous part consisting of fields, grazing land etc. (b) circulatory part consisting of village roads, streets and

lanes etc.

COMPONENTS OF MORPHOLOGY

(c) central part provided by the built- up area of the village.

(d) special part marked with temple, school, Panchayat ghar etc

• The built-up area consisting of clusters of houses is surrounded by cultivated fields and linked with kachcha and pakka roads or village footpaths.

 The main village and its outlying hamlets, though physically detached from each other, function as an integrated unit under the old jajmani system

The main site, generally occupying the central location and inhabited by early village settlers (mostly belonging to the upper castes and zamindars), forms the nucleus of the village and is known as ‘ Khaas Gaon'.  Others around it are small hamlets named after the dominant castes residing therein (mostly low castes, land-less labourers, village artisans or emigrants from the main village) and are called ('purwa', 'pura‘ , 'tola', 'toli', nagala', 'patti', etc.

The general pattern of land use includes multi- cropped best soil zone (Gauhan or Goind) around the inhabited site followed by less fertile and low irrigated single cropped zone (Manjha or Har) in the periphery.

The built-up area, forming the nucleus of the settlement, attracts maximum concentration of socio economic activities and transport movements. 

High ranking castes like Brahmans, Rajputs , kashtriya , etc, possess houses with large courtyard and separate apartment for each young female, while low ranking castes specially untouchables have single room hut/house shared by all members of the family and at times by cattle as well without much open space, courtyard and lanes, etc. Ahir, Lodh, Kachhi, Kurmi, etc, together with many service castes like Lohar, Kahar, Kohar, Barhai, etc.,

EFFECT OF SOCIO SPATIAL CHARACTER

The nucleus of the village is usually occupied by high castes, while subordinate castes have pe ripheral locations. Untouchables like Chamar, Pasi, Mehtars, Dhanuk, etc., build their houses far away from the high castes on the periphery interspersed by village-grove, cultivated fields, water bodies, usar lands etc.

caste based hamlets emerge within the village territory using various epithets like Chamarauti, Chamartola, Lodhian, Ahiran, Kurmiyan, Thakuran, Babhanauti, Babhantola, Kaithan, etc.

 In case of compact settlements out-castes generally lived on the outer parts of the built-up area in a direction (south, south-east and north etc.) less conducive for wind movement, for even air gets polluted after coming in contact with a Shudra 's body

Sangawali (area 218 hectares and population 1118 in 1979) village in Etawah district of Uttar Pradesh has been taken as a case study to analyze socio-spatial structure.

The village has been named after 'Singh' or lion abounding in the forested tracts during early days (Singawali or Sangawali = the row or flock of lions) and its hamlet, about a kilometre in the north, is called Khera or Mohkamnagar (after Mohkam Singh, the Raja of Partabner).

The village falls under the joint owner ship of Brahman (population 266 in 1979) and Rajput (population 269 in 1979) castes that together retain 76.17 per cent of the total village area

Case Study: Sangawali Village

 Some 500-600 years ago Hinnari Brahmans under the pressure of famine conditions in Central India migrated to Khera and neighbouring villages (Bhogipura, Bhataura, Jagsaura, etc). They were often troubled by the Meos for whose extirpation they invited Bhadauria Rajput Thakur Jairam Singh from Bijaipura village (hardly 2 km in the south) and granted him gift of the eastern half of the village territory. A new settlement was founded to which Brahmans also joined leaving out Khera to be settled by Lodh, Ahir, Khatik, Nai and Mehtar, etc. who mainly came to perform various services under the jajmani system

Village Sangawali has a compact and com plex socio-spatial structure. Here Brahman and Rajput dwellings, without any apparent segregation occupy the central and eastern parts of the village-area.

Service castes like Dhobi, Barhai, Kumhar, Kachhi, etc have built their houses in the north while untouchables like Dhanuk and Shudra etc reside in the western periphery of the inhabited area.

there were wide gaps between the houses of upper and lower castes but with the growth of population and changing socio-economic norms this intervening space is gradually shrinking.

It is mainly due to the fact that these socially degraded castes still lack economic power which is very important for gaining social status and prestige. On perusal of land records it has been found that Dhanuk, Jatav and Muslim, who together constitute about 20 percent of the village population, own only 2.71 per cent of the village cropped land and others like Kori, Khatik, Barhai and Mehtar, etc., do not possess any land at all.

Their conditions have been worsened in the recent years due to a number of faulty decisions taken by the government which not only aggravated caste consciousness (which was otherwise disap pearing) but deprived their main source of liveli hood (by working as agricultural labourers and share croppers) without giving them alternative means of sustenance.

http://www.preservearticles.com/2012013022141/short-notes-on-the-morphology-of-rural-settlements-in-india.html

references