Anthropology 2021 Paper II 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Write short notes

Q1

Write short notes on the following in about 150 words each: (a) Purushartha and righteous living today (10 marks) (b) Relevance of tribe-caste continuum (10 marks) (c) Harappan seals (10 marks) (d) Caste and social capital (10 marks) (e) Factionalism and politics in rural India (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित प्रत्येक पर लगभग 150 शब्दों में लघु टिप्पणी लिखिए : (a) आज के परिवेश में पुरुषार्थ और न्यायसंगत जीवन (10 अंक) (b) जनजाति-जाति सातत्य की प्रासंगिकता (10 अंक) (c) हड़प्पन मोहरे (10 अंक) (d) जाति और सामाजिक पूँजी (10 अंक) (e) गुटबंदी और ग्रामीण भारत में राजनीति (10 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2021 Anthropology questions

Directive word: Write short notes

This question asks you to write short notes. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

The directive 'write short notes' demands concise, information-dense responses for each sub-part. Allocate approximately 30 words per mark (150 words × 5 parts = 750 total). Spend roughly 3 minutes per part: (a) define Purushartha's four goals and link to contemporary ethical living; (b) explain Bailey's/Srinivas's continuum model with current relevance; (c) describe seal features, script, and trade significance; (d) connect Bourdieu's social capital to caste networks; (e) analyze factional politics using village studies. No introduction or conclusion needed—begin directly with definitions.

Key points expected

(a) Purushartha: Define dharma, artha, kama, moksha; explain their hierarchical integration; apply to modern work-life balance and ethical dilemmas in contemporary Indian society
(b) Tribe-caste continuum: Explain Bailey's (1960) and Srinivas's framework; note fluid boundaries and Sanskritization; assess relevance for ST reservation debates and tribal identity politics today
(c) Harappan seals: Describe steatite material, unicorn/bull motifs, Indus script, standardization; note their use in trade administration and religious significance; cite Marshall's or Parpola's interpretations
(d) Caste and social capital: Apply Bourdieu's framework; explain bonding/bridging capital in caste networks; cite Putnam or Krishna on how caste facilitates economic mobility and political mobilization
(e) Factionalism in rural politics: Define factions based on caste, kinship, patronage; cite Oscar Lewis (Rampur), Beteille (Sripuram), or Bailey's 'political resources'; explain impact on democratic participation and development

Evaluation rubric

Dimension	Weight	Max marks	Excellent	Average	Poor
Concept correctness	20%	10	For (a), accurately distinguishes four Purusharthas with correct Sanskrit etymology; for (b), correctly identifies Bailey's continuum versus dichotomy; for (c), precisely dates seals (2600-1900 BCE) and identifies steatite; for (d), correctly applies Bourdieu's three capitals; for (e), distinguishes factions from parties with proper definition	Defines most concepts correctly but conflates Purusharthas or misattributes continuum theorists; vague on seal materials or dates; superficial social capital application; conflates factions with interest groups	Fundamental errors: confuses Purushartha with varna, treats tribe-caste as binary opposition, misidentifies seals as pottery, confuses social capital with human capital, describes factions merely as 'groups'
Theoretical framing	20%	10	For (a), cites Kane's 'History of Dharmasastra'; for (b), deploys Bailey's 'Caste and the Economic Frontier' or Xaxa's post-development critique; for (c), references Possehl's 'Indus Age' or Parpola's decipherment attempts; for (d), uses Bourdieu's 'Forms of Capital' or Putnam's bonding/bridging distinction; for (e), applies Bailey's 'political system' framework or Redfield-Singer great/little tradition	Mentions theorists without specific works; generic references to 'anthropologists' or 'scholars'; recognizes Bourdieu or Bailey without theoretical depth; misses post-structural critiques	No theoretical anchoring; invents theories or misattributes (e.g., calling Durkheim the theorist of Purushartha); complete absence of scholarly framework across all parts
Ethnographic / Indian examples	20%	10	For (a), cites contemporary Indian ethical movements or ashram traditions; for (b), gives specific cases like Bhilala-Bhil continuum or Oraon-Ho transitions; for (c), names specific seals (Pashupati, unicorn, Mohenjo-daro bull); for (d), cites Marwaris of Kolkata, Nadars of Tamil Nadu, or Jat networks; for (e), references specific villages (Rampur, Sripuram, Shamirpet) with caste composition	Generic regional references without specificity; mentions 'tribes of Central India' or 'village studies' without names; recognizes seal motifs without archaeological context; vague 'business communities' example	No Indian examples; uses Western cases (Amish for caste, New England town meetings for factions); factually wrong examples (Harappa in South India); completely decontextualized responses
Comparative analysis	20%	10	For (a), compares traditional vs. modern interpretations of dharma; for (b), contrasts Bailey's continuum with Ghurye's assimilation or von Fürer-Haimendorf's isolation; for (c), compares Harappan with Mesopotamian cylinder seals; for (d), contrasts caste-based vs. class-based social capital; for (e), compares factionalism in dominant vs. subordinate caste villages	Implicit comparisons without explicit framing; notes differences without systematic contrast; misses cross-cultural or diachronic comparative opportunities; one part has comparison, others lack it	No comparative element; treats each concept in isolation; confuses comparison with mere listing; fails to engage with scholarly debates on any part
Conclusion & applied angle	20%	10	Each part ends with sharp contemporary relevance: (a) Purushartha for sustainable development goals; (b) continuum for Sixth Schedule vs. Fifth Schedule governance; (c) seals for understanding early Indian urbanism and national heritage; (d) social capital for inclusive growth policies; (e) factionalism for Panchayati Raj effectiveness—demonstrating policy consciousness	Generic concluding statements ('thus it is important'); applied angle present but superficial or for only 2-3 parts; misses policy implications; concludes with summary rather than synthesis	No conclusions in any part; abrupt endings; completely ignores 'today' in (a), 'relevance' in (b); no applied or policy dimension; ends mid-argument or with irrelevant personal opinion

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →