Into how many phases the growth of anthropology in India was divided
by D.N. Majumdar and L. P.Vidyarthi? Explain?
Into how many phases the growth of anthropology in India was divided by D.N. Majumdar and L. P.Vidyarthi? Explain?
Share
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
Introduction
Anthropology in India has undergone significant growth and development, influenced by colonial encounters, nationalist movements, and post-independence reforms. D.N. Majumdar and L.P. Vidyarthi, two prominent Indian anthropologists, divided the growth of anthropology in India into distinct phases. This comprehensive solution aims to explore these phases and their significance in shaping the trajectory of anthropology in India.
1. Colonial Period: Early Beginnings and Ethnographic Surveys
The colonial period marked the beginning of anthropology in India, with British colonial administrators and scholars conducting ethnographic surveys to study the diverse cultures and peoples of the Indian subcontinent. During this phase, anthropological research was primarily focused on documenting the customs, languages, and social organizations of indigenous communities. The establishment of institutions such as the Asiatic Society of Bengal and the Indian Museum provided platforms for collecting and studying ethnographic materials.
2. Nationalist Period: Indigenous Anthropological Research and Critique of Colonial Scholarship
The nationalist period saw the emergence of indigenous anthropological research and a critique of colonial scholarship. Indian scholars began to challenge colonial narratives and stereotypes about Indian society and culture, advocating for a more nuanced and culturally sensitive approach to studying Indian communities. D.N. Majumdar and L.P. Vidyarthi were among the pioneering Indian anthropologists who contributed to the development of indigenous anthropological research, focusing on issues such as caste, kinship, and village studies.
3. Post-Independence Period: Institutionalization and Expansion of Anthropology
The post-independence period witnessed the institutionalization and expansion of anthropology in India. Following independence in 1947, the Indian government established universities, research institutes, and funding agencies to support anthropological research and education. Anthropology departments were established in universities across the country, offering undergraduate and postgraduate programs in anthropology. This period also saw the emergence of interdisciplinary approaches to anthropology, with scholars drawing insights from sociology, history, economics, and other disciplines.
4. Contemporary Period: Challenges and Opportunities
The contemporary period is characterized by both challenges and opportunities for anthropology in India. On one hand, globalization, urbanization, and social change present new research opportunities for anthropologists to study the dynamics of cultural transformation and identity politics. On the other hand, anthropologists grapple with ethical dilemmas, political pressures, and funding constraints in conducting research in diverse and rapidly changing contexts. Additionally, there is a growing recognition of the importance of indigenous knowledge systems and community-based research approaches in anthropology.
Significance of Majumdar and Vidyarthi's Phases
D.N. Majumdar and L.P. Vidyarthi's division of the growth of anthropology in India into phases is significant for several reasons. Firstly, it provides a historical framework for understanding the evolution of anthropology in India, tracing its development from colonial encounters to post-independence nation-building efforts. Secondly, it highlights the contributions of indigenous anthropologists like Majumdar and Vidyarthi in challenging colonial narratives and shaping the discipline of anthropology in India. Thirdly, it underscores the institutionalization and expansion of anthropology as an academic discipline in India, reflecting broader trends in higher education and research.
Conclusion
D.N. Majumdar and L.P. Vidyarthi's division of the growth of anthropology in India into phases provides a comprehensive framework for understanding the historical trajectory of the discipline. From its beginnings in the colonial period to its institutionalization and expansion in the post-independence era, anthropology in India has undergone significant transformations, shaped by colonial encounters, nationalist movements, and post-independence reforms. Majumdar and Vidyarthi's phases highlight the contributions of indigenous anthropologists, the institutionalization of anthropology in academic institutions, and the challenges and opportunities facing the discipline in contemporary India.