Anthropology 2023 Paper II 50 marks Discuss

Q8

(a) Discuss the distribution of tribes in different geographical regions of India. Identify the distinct institutional features of tribal societies of these regions. (20 marks) (b) Critically evaluate the contributions of S. C. Roy to Indian anthropology. (15 marks) (c) How are Other Backward Classes identified? Enumerating the important features, elucidate the recent changes in their social and economic life. (15 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) भारत के विभिन्न भौगोलिक क्षेत्रों में जनजातियों के वितरण की विवेचना कीजिए। इन क्षेत्रों के जनजातीय समाजों की विशिष्ट संस्थागत विशेषताओं की पहचान कीजिए। (20 अंक) (b) भारतीय मानवविज्ञान में एस० सी० रॉय के योगदान का समालोचनात्मक मूल्यांकन कीजिए। (15 अंक) (c) अन्य पिछड़ा वर्ग की पहचान कैसे की जाती है? महत्वपूर्ण विशेषताओं की गणना करते हुए उनके सामाजिक और आर्थिक जीवन में हाल के परिवर्तनों को स्पष्ट कीजिए। (15 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2023 Anthropology questions

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to 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 'discuss' for part (a) and 'critically evaluate' for part (b) demand analytical exposition with balanced coverage. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure with a brief composite introduction, then tackle each sub-part sequentially with clear sub-headings, ensuring part (a) covers all five tribal zones with institutional specifics, part (b) balances Roy's contributions with critical limitations, and part (c) integrates identification criteria with contemporary transformations. Conclude with a synthesized observation on tribal-OBC interface and anthropology's policy relevance.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Distribution across five zones—Northeast (Hills and Plains), Central, Southern, Western, and Himalayan regions—with specific tribe names (e.g., Nagas, Gonds, Todas, Bhils, Gujjars-Bakarwals)
  • Part (a): Distinct institutional features per region—Northeast: segmentary lineage and village republics; Central: clan organization and territorial panchayats; Southern: podu cultivation and matrilineal traces; Western: Bhil confederacies; Himalayan: transhumance and composite economy
  • Part (b): S.C. Roy's pioneering contributions—first Indian ethnographer, empirical fieldwork among Mundas, Oraons, Khonds; founder of 'Man in India'; advocacy for tribal rights and land protection; critique of colonial ethnography
  • Part (b): Critical evaluation—methodological limitations (absence of structural-functional rigor, romanticization of 'noble savage'), theoretical unsystematic nature, yet foundational status for Indian anthropology
  • Part (c): OBC identification criteria—Mandal Commission indicators (social, educational, economic backwardness), NCBC role, creamy layer exclusion, state-wise variations in lists
  • Part (c): Recent socio-economic changes—Sanskritization and occupational diversification, political mobilization and OBC assertion, post-Mandal reservation impacts, urbanization and identity politics, tension between class and caste mobility

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Accurately defines tribal zones with precise boundaries; correctly identifies Roy's specific works (e.g., 'The Mundas and Their Country'); accurately states Mandal criteria and creamy layer thresholds; no conflation of ST/OBC categoriesBroadly correct zone identification but vague on boundaries; mentions Roy's works without specificity; basic understanding of OBC criteria but confuses some technical aspects; minor category conflationsIncorrect zone-tribe mapping (e.g., placing Todas in Northeast); misattributes Roy's contributions or confuses with other scholars; fundamental errors in OBC identification mechanism; treats ST and OBC as interchangeable
Theoretical framing20%10For (a) applies Steward's cultural ecology and Elwin's isolation-integration continuum; for (b) positions Roy within diffusionist and indigenist frameworks with critical distance; for (c) uses Srinivas's Sanskritization and social capital theory to explain OBC mobilityMentions theoretical frameworks in passing without systematic application; describes Roy's work descriptively without theoretical situating; lists OBC changes without theoretical explanation of mechanismsAbsent theoretical framing; purely descriptive treatment of all three parts; no engagement with anthropological theory whatsoever; confuses theoretical frameworks
Ethnographic / Indian examples20%10Rich specificity: for (a) cites Naga village republics, Ghotul among Muria Gonds, Toda dairy temples; for (b) references Roy's Khond and Oraon monographs with publication dates; for (c) cites Yadavs of UP/Bihar, Jats in Haryana, or Marathas in Maharashtra with concrete transformation evidenceSome ethnographic references but generic (e.g., 'tribes of Madhya Pradesh' without naming Gonds); mentions Roy's fieldwork without specific groups; general statements about OBC communities without named examplesNo specific ethnographic examples; vague references like 'some tribes in the south'; no mention of Roy's actual field sites; entirely abstract treatment of OBCs without any community names
Comparative analysis20%10For (a) systematically compares institutional features across zones (e.g., Northeast segmentary vs Central clan organization); for (b) compares Roy with contemporaries (Risley, Hutton) and successors (Fürer-Haimendorf, Dube); for (c) compares pre- and post-Mandal OBC status, and inter-state variation in OBC compositionSome comparative intent but underdeveloped; mentions Risley in passing without systematic comparison; notes some OBC changes without structured before-after analysisNo comparative element; treats each zone, Roy's work, and OBC situation in isolation; fails to draw any parallels or contrasts across space or time
Conclusion & applied angle20%10Synthesizes tribal diversity with contemporary challenges (PESA implementation, Sixth Schedule demands); evaluates Roy's legacy for current tribal policy; critically assesses OBC reservation outcomes and creamy layer debates; suggests future directions for anthropological engagement with scheduled communitiesBrief summary conclusion without synthesis; generic statement on Roy's importance; superficial observation on OBC progress; no applied policy dimensionAbsent or abrupt conclusion; mere restatement of points; no connection to contemporary relevance; no applied 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 2023 Paper II