Revision summary
Risley used seven racial types and nasal index, tied to caste rank, in the 1901 census tradition. Sarkar used fewer types, an Australoid tribal base, and more caution about language equals race. Sarkar is better as a critique of colonial ranking, not as a final biology. Guha’s 1931 types are another typology. Law now counts social backwardness, not racial census boxes.
Model answer
Introduction
Herbert Hope Risley classified Indian peoples for the colonial census by anthropometry and caste rank. S. S. Sarkar classified them later as an Indian human biologist with more weight on tribes, language, and a simpler set of types. Both are racial typologies. Comparison is about method and politics, not about which race map is true forever.
Body
Risley’s approach
- Risley, in the 1901 census and The People of India, offered seven types: Turko-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Scytho-Dravidian, Aryo-Dravidian, Mongolo-Dravidian, Mongoloid, and Dravidian.
- The nasal index was his favourite measurement. He linked finer noses to higher caste rank.
- The scheme served empire: inequality looked like biology. Tribe and caste were placed on one racial ladder.
Sarkar’s approach
- S. S. Sarkar proposed fewer types, commonly taught as Australoid, Indo-Aryan, Irano-Scythian, Mundari (or Mundari-Malayan), and Mongolian, with notes on possible Negrito traces in southern hills.
- He treated many South and central Indian populations as having an Australoid base with later overlays, rather than one “Dravidian race” matched to a language family.
- He used morphology, some blood-group data as it appeared, prehistoric archaeology, and tribal ethnography. He rejected Risley’s nose-to-varna ladder as the main story.
Comparison
- Criteria: Risley centred nasal index and caste; Sarkar centred broader morphology, tribes, and language as a separate map.
- Number of types: seven mixed labels versus a shorter list. Neither matches later genetics.
- Politics: Risley naturalised colonial hierarchy. Sarkar is post-colonial in mood and less useful for ranking jatis, but still boxes living people.
- B. S. Guha’s 1931 types are a third typology often taught beside both. People of India (Anthropological Survey) later described communities as cultural units.
Critical judgement
- Sarkar is better than Risley because he weakens caste-as-race and takes Munda and other tribes seriously.
- Both fail as modern biology. Clines, mixture, and endogamy (later population genetics) replace types.
- Administration should use ST, SC, and OBC as legal-social lists, not Risley or Sarkar types. Indra Sawhney treats backwardness as social and educational.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD R[Risley] --> N[Nasal index seven types] R --> C[Caste as race] S[Sarkar] --> T[Fewer types tribes] S --> L[Language not equal biology] G[Genetics] --> X[Clines mixture]
Conclusion
Risley measured noses and mapped them onto caste for the census. Sarkar reduced types and separated language from a single Dravidian race. Sarkar is the less colonial of the two. Neither is a living scientific map of the peoples of India.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Is caste mobility a recent phenomenon? Discuss in the light of Indological and Empirical context.
Next question in the 2023 paper (Q4). View answer →
-
Should Sarkar’s types issue caste certificates?
No. ST, SC, and OBC are legal lists. Biology does not certify a jati.
-
Did Sarkar prove a living Negrito race in India?
He discussed traces. Later genetics has not established a separate mainland Negrito race in the popular census sense.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2023 · Q1(a) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Material culture and archaeology -
2023 · Q1(b) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Interface between Purushartha and Ashrama -
2023 · Q1(d) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Prehistoric rock arts from Uttarakhand -
2023 · Q2(b) · Anthropology GS 2 · 15 marks
"Indus Valley was the first settlement of the big civilization." Comment critically. -
2023 · Q3(b) · Anthropology GS 2 · 15 marks
Was Mesolithic culture the first step towards a sedentary way of life? Illustrate your answer by citing suitable examples. -
2023 · Q5(a) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Scheduled areas -
2023 · Q5(c) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Village as little republic -
2023 · Q5(d) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Dravidian language and their subgroups
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2023 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Material culture and archaeology
Evolution of the Indian Culture and Civilization
Material culture is objects and built space left by people. Archaeology recovers them in stratigraphy and infers subsistence, rank, and exchange. Binford stressed function; Hodder stressed meaning. Indian illustrations include Hunsgi, Navdatoli, Bhimbetka, and Harappan weights. Ethnography of living potters and hunters checks how objects enter the soil.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2023 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Interface between Purushartha and Ashrama
Evolution of the Indian Culture and Civilization
Purushartha is dharma, artha, kama, and moksha. Ashrama is student, householder, forest-dweller, and renouncer. The householder is the stage that must hold artha and kama under dharma. Dumont and Kane treat the pairing as a civilisational ideal. Karve’s ethnography shows that most lives remain in the household stage.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2023 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Jajmani system : continuity and change
Caste system in India
Jajmani is hereditary service of artisan and serving castes for landed patrons, named by Wiser. Beidelman stressed coercion; Srinivas and Lewis described harvest shares and rites. Ritual calls to barber and priest continue in many villages. Cash wages, mills, land reform, and MGNREGA have broken daily dependence. Epstein’s Mysore villages show the market replacing customary shares.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.