Vol. 6, Issue 4, Part A (2020)

Abstract
Role of the masses in social transformation had been recognized by the mid-nineteenth century. There are three approaches to study social movements: historical, psychological and sociological. Historians try to understand the life-cycle of a movement. They pose the question: how did movements get institutionalized? They try to analysis motives and beliefs of the participants who are the parts of the masses which can be mobilized into collective action. Sociological approach tries to analyses the development of an ideology and its functions to the group which adheres to it, and more generally the conditions under which a group will fight in the name of a set of beliefs. A sociological approach to social movements presupposes a theory of society because collective action is possible responses to crises, which occurs in society. The base of these crises may be found into the wide range of societies and its different structures of deprivations. The main concern of this study is to understand Kudmi-Mahata’s social transformation comparing the model of sanskritization. In the case of Kudmi-Mahatas, an identity crisis may be occurred as there is a mismatch of identity. The older generation wants to be identified as ‘Hindu Kshatriya’ while the younger generation as ‘totemic Kudmi tribal’. Therefore, it is an example of ‘status-deprivation’ which creates an identity crisis among the Kudmi people. To restore their aboriginal identity they have started a process of cultural revivalism through their scripts and languages and festivals from first half of previous century. Therefore, in this paper author has tried to understand two ways of social change among this community.