Anthropology 2021 Paper II 50 marks Critically discuss

Q2

(a) Critically discuss the origin of Indus Valley Civilization. Mention the evidences of its endogenous origin from the pre-Harappan sites. (20 marks) (b) Give the distribution and characteristic features of Upper Paleolithic culture in India. (15 marks) (c) Discuss the morphological features and phylogenetic position of Ramapithecus. (15 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) सिन्धु घाटी सभ्यता की उत्पत्ति का समीक्षात्मक वर्णन कीजिए। पूर्व-हड़प्पन स्थलों से इसकी देशज उत्पत्ति के प्रमाणों का उल्लेख कीजिए। (20 अंक) (b) भारत में उच्च पुरापाषाण संस्कृति के विस्तार और विशेषताओं का वर्णन कीजिए। (15 अंक) (c) रामापिथेकस की आकृति-संबंधी विशेषताओं और जातिवृत्तीय स्थान का वर्णन कीजिए। (15 अंक)

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

Directive word: Critically discuss

This question asks you to critically discuss. 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 'critically discuss' for part (a) demands balanced argumentation with evidence evaluation, while parts (b) and (c) require descriptive-analytical treatment. Allocate approximately 40% of word budget (~400 words) to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each (~300 words) to parts (b) and (c). Structure with a brief composite introduction, three distinct sections addressing each sub-part with clear sub-headings, and a synthesizing conclusion that connects India's deep archaeological continuity to contemporary heritage management.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Critical evaluation of endogenous vs. diffusionist theories; detailed evidence from Mehrgarh (Baluchistan), Amri, Kot Diji, and Kalibangan showing gradual cultural evolution from pre-Harappan to mature Harappan phases
  • Part (a): Analysis of Wheeler vs. Fairservis vs. Possehl debates; mention of regional variants (Sothi-Siswal, Anarta, Padri cultures) demonstrating indigenous development
  • Part (b): Distribution across Bhimbetka, Belan Valley, Patne, Kurnool caves; specific sites like Chopani-Mando and Baghor II with radiocarbon chronology
  • Part (b): Characteristic features: blade and burin technology, bone tools, cave and open-air sites, art manifestations (Bhimbetka rock shelters), hunting-gathering economy with faunal evidence
  • Part (c): Morphological features of Ramapithecus: thick enamel, reduced canines, dental arcade shape, facial structure; distinction from Sivapithecus
  • Part (c): Phylogenetic position: debate between hominid ancestor (Simons, Pilbeam) vs. ancestral orang-utan (Andrews, Kelley); significance of Siwalik deposits and later discoveries (Kenya, Turkey)
  • Integration: How these three strands—urban origins, Paleolithic foundations, and hominid evolution—demonstrate India's crucial position in Old World prehistory

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness22%11Demonstrates precise chronological understanding: for (a) correctly sequences pre-Harappan (7000-2600 BCE) to mature phases; for (b) distinguishes Upper Paleolithic (40,000-10,000 BP) from earlier periods; for (c) accurately describes Ramapithecus dental and cranial morphology without conflating with Sivapithecus or GigantopithecusBasic chronological framework present but with minor errors (e.g., confusing pre-Harappan with early Harappan, or misplacing Ramapithecus in Pliocene); some morphological descriptions incompleteFundamental errors in dating, site identification, or taxonomic classification; conflates distinct archaeological phases or hominoid genera; misidentifies key sites
Theoretical framing18%9For (a), critically engages with diffusionist (Wheeler, Marshall) vs. indigenous evolution models (Fairservis, Possahl, Shaffer); for (c), evaluates cladistic vs. phenetic approaches to hominoid phylogeny; demonstrates awareness of how theoretical shifts (radiocarbon dating, New Archaeology) transformed interpretationsMentions major scholars without systematic critique; theoretical positions stated but not evaluated; limited engagement with paradigm shiftsAbsent or incorrect theoretical context; treats all sources as equally valid without critical discrimination; no awareness of changing interpretive frameworks
Ethnographic / Indian examples22%11Rich site-specific detail: for (a) cites Mehrgarh's aceramic Neolithic, Amri's painted pottery, Kot Diji's fortification precursors; for (b) names specific Bhimbetka shelters, Belan Valley sites with tool types; for (c) specifies Siwalik locations (Haritalyangar, Nagri) and geological formationsSome specific examples but incomplete coverage; major sites mentioned but without diagnostic details; regional distribution broadly indicatedGeneric references without site names; incorrect attribution of finds; reliance on outdated or discredited examples
Comparative analysis20%10For (a), compares pre-Harappan regional variants (Amri-Nal vs. Kot Diji vs. Sothi-Siswal); for (b), contrasts Indian Upper Paleolithic with European/African counterparts; for (c), compares Ramapithecus with Dryopithecus, Sivapithecus, and early Australopithecus; draws meaningful parallels across all three partsLimited comparison within parts but no cross-part synthesis; some contrastive statements without developed analysisIsolated treatment of each sub-part; no comparative element; misses obvious opportunities for analytical connection
Conclusion & applied angle18%9Synthesizes three sub-parts into coherent narrative of South Asian deep history; connects archaeological evidence to contemporary heritage conservation challenges; reflects on how genetic and isotopic studies are revising earlier interpretations; proposes future research directionsBrief summary restating main points without synthesis; generic concluding statement; minimal applied relevanceAbsent or abrupt conclusion; no connection between sub-parts; no contemporary relevance or forward-looking element

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 →

More from Anthropology 2021 Paper II