DOI: 10.36344/ccijhss.2021.v07i07.001

Pages: 128-141

Anthropology in India is divided into various phases, such as colonial ethnology/ethnography and postcolonial anthropology. The classical evolutionism, diffusionism and Orientalism, which had dominated colonial ethnology/ethnography, had also influenced the earlier phase of anthropology in postcolonial India. In fact, postcolonial anthropology is itself an incoherent lot with diverse forms and ideas. In the long history of Indian anthropology, there appeared some works carrying theoretical bearing and applied relevance, yet many chroniclers have undervalued such works. This author has earlier appraised some evaluations of Indian anthropology provided by Debnath (1999), Berger, (2012) and Guha (2017), among others. This article takes clues from such earlier appraisal and locates within a larger historical canvas an encyclopaedia entry contributed by S. Deshpande and edited by Hilary Callan (2018), which has ignored many foundational works of Indian anthropology. Placing this critique in a larger historical context of colonial/ postcolonial anthropology, this author aims to focus attention on major signposts of social anthropology. Second objective is to dispel many myths and misconceptions about the anthropological survey of India, mainly its People of India study. Ultimately, by citing some ethnographic illustrations, this article endeavours to ascertain a trend of ‘indigenousness’ and demonstrate thereby the Swadeshi stance of Indian anthropology.