Revision summary
Risley used nasal index and seven racial types tied to caste rank for the colonial census. Sarkar offered fewer types, more tribal and linguistic caution, and less nose-to-varna politics. Sarkar is better than Risley as a critique of colonial ranking, not as a modern genetic map. Guha’s 1931 types are another typological cousin. Reservation law now uses social backwardness, not racial census boxes.
Model answer
Introduction
Herbert Hope Risley classified Indian peoples for the colonial census by nose, colour and caste ranking. S. S. Sarkar classified them later as a human biologist, using a wider set of morphological and genetic hints. The question is whether Sarkar improved on Risley, not whether either scheme is true for ever.
Body
Risley’s scheme
- Risley (1901 census, The People of India) offered seven types: Turko-Iranian, Indo-Aryan, Scytho-Dravidian, Aryo-Dravidian, Mongolo-Dravidian, Mongoloid, Dravidian. The nasal index was his favourite number. He tied type to caste rank: finer noses higher in the varna ladder. The scheme served empire: it made inequality look like biology.
B. S. Guha later used a different set of types for the 1931 census and the Anthropological Survey. Both remain typological races.
Sarkar’s scheme
S. S. Sarkar, working in the mid-twentieth century, proposed a simpler set often taught as Australoid, Indo-Aryan, Irano-Scythian, Mundari-speaking (or Mundari-Malayan), Mongolian, with regional notes on Negrito traces in the south-west hills. He paid more attention to tribal India, language families and prehistoric archaeology than Risley did. He treated many South Indian and central Indian populations as having an Australoid base with later overlays, rather than as a single “Dravidian race” invented to match a language.
- Features of his approach: fewer grand types; more weight on tribes (Munda, Bhil, Chenchu, Kadar debates); scepticism of Risley’s nose-to-caste ladder; use of blood groups as they became available, still inside a racial typology.
Was it better?
Better as science than Risley: Sarkar dropped the crudest caste-equals-race move. He saw language and biology as different maps. He took tribal variation seriously. Not good enough as modern biology: both men sorted living people into boxes. Cavalli-Sforza, later craniometrics, and Reich’s ancient DNA show clines, mixture and caste endogamy as social history, not seven or five races. The so-called Negrito problem in India remains a weak, recycled label.
Guha is often preferred in Indian syllabi because of anthropometry at a national scale. Sarkar is preferred to Risley because he is post-colonial in mood and less serviceable to census ranking. Neither is a substitute for genetics plus ethnography.
The Anthropological Survey of India’s People of India project and the Census’s refusal to list race are the institutional aftermath: the state still counts SC, ST and OBC, not Risley types. Indra Sawhney and later reservation law treat backwardness as social and educational, which is the right lesson from the failure of racial census.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD R[Risley] --> N[Nasal index and seven types] R --> C[Caste as race] S[Sarkar] --> T[Tribes and fewer types] S --> L[Language not equal biology] G[Genetics] --> X[Clines and mixture]
Conclusion
Sarkar’s classification is better than Risley’s because it weakens the nose–caste ladder and attends to tribes and language. It is still a racial typology. Living anthropology uses clines, caste endogamy and history, not Risley or Sarkar as a final map.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Evaluate the impact of Christianity on Scheduled Tribe societies of North-East India
Next question in the 2025 paper (Q2). View answer →
-
Should Sarkar’s types be used in administration?
No. ST, SC and OBC lists are political-legal lists. Biology does not issue caste certificates.
-
Did Sarkar prove an Indian Negrito stratum?
He discussed it. Later genetics has not established a separate living Negrito race in India comparable to Andaman isolates in the popular sense.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2025 · Q1(a) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
'Soanian cultural' tradition -
2025 · Q1(b) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Caste domination, factionalism and political power -
2025 · Q1(d) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Verrier Elwin's philosophy with respect to Arunachal Pradesh -
2025 · Q3(a) · Anthropology GS 2 · 20 marks
Describe the distinctive features and distribution of Upper Palaeolithic of India -
2025 · Q4(c) · Anthropology GS 2 · 15 marks
Critically examine the concept of Scheduled Tribe (ST) and mention the limitations of administrator's criteria -
2025 · Q5(c) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Tribalism and Pseudotribalism -
2025 · Q5(d) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Varnashrama and its contemporary relevance -
2025 · Q5(e) · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Lothal dockyard and international trade relations.
More from this paper
Q1(a) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
'Soanian cultural' tradition
Evolution of the Indian Culture and Civilization
The Soanian is a cobble-tool tradition of the north-west Siwalik rivers, named by de Terra and Paterson. Typical tools are choppers, chopping tools and flakes in quartzite, not handaxe–cleaver sets. Indian occurrences include Pinjore–Nalagarh, Guler and related Beas–Sutlej terraces. Movius once opposed it to Acheulian Asia; later work finds overlap and mixed surface collections. It records Pleistocene foothill settlement, not a separate race of makers.
Q1(b) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Caste domination, factionalism and political power
Evolution of the Indian Culture and Civilization
Srinivas’s dominant caste combines numbers, land, rank and an educated elite. Factions are vertical followings around leaders, described by Bailey and others. Village domination scaled into regional parties after adult franchise. Mandal and Indra Sawhney widened OBC claims; panchayat reservation shares some offices. Caste blocs remain, but they now work through parties, cooperatives and social media as well as the village.
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2025 · Anthropology GS 2 · 10 marks
Regionalism and Autonomy
The concept of ethnicity
Regionalism politicises territory through language, tribe, history or economy. Autonomy is the constitutional reply: new states, Fifth and Sixth Schedules, PESA, Article 371, Inner Line. Bhuria and Xaxa named the gap between paper PESA and practice. Bommai, Sarkaria and Punchhi frame the Union–state balance. Examples include Telangana, Bodoland, Gorkhaland, Naga accords and resource belts under Samata and FRA.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.