Contours of South Asian Social Anthropology: Connecting India and Nepal

The history of the development of South Asian anthropology/sociology relays the tale of colonial academics under foreign scholarships, relations of power in knowledge production, and the idea of South Asia as a periphery. Epistemological concerns in this field point out the necessity of a conceptual renewal aiming to explore not just a political and geographical South Asia but also a more cultural and civilizational South Asia. The author visualizes South Asia as a potential hub of transformation under an epistemic framework and proposes a renewal of conceptualization of research due to the absence of such framework in the anthropological/sociological studies of South Asia. Sarkar opines that simultaneity and multiplicity are the fundamental principles of epistemic South Asian studies, and a true South Asian ‘self’ constitutes connections and continuity of that connection between multiple cultures. The aim of the author is not to define South Asian anthropology/sociology as devoid of Western inspirations and influences, rather it is to “dilute the Eurocentric ideas” as a point of reference and “not as a totalizing one” (p. 20) in the life of South Asia. The book then narrows on India-Nepal anthropological/sociological studies.

In locating Nepal and India in one another’s social anthropological studies, Sarkar elaborates on three major sections: historical, descriptive, and analytical researches. Researches done by Indian scholars on Nepal contributed to Nepal Studies in the form of book reviews, articles, and literature reviews. The studies also elaborate on the extension of the Hindu gaze over Nepal and assess analytical contributions of the Indian scholars in their anthropological/sociological research of Nepali communities such as Newars, Kirats, and others. Sarkar acknowledges the dedication of the Indian anthropologists/sociologists studying India’s own concerns such as decolonization, indigenization, and nationalism. He is of the opinion that the “Indian anthropologist researching within India is, thus, both an ‘insider’ and ‘outsider’ in relation to his or her subject area” (p. 65). On the one hand, social anthropology and sociology of India about Nepal was composed of issues like migration, rural and agrarian social structure, rural social change, feudalism, rural poverty and development, and cultural life. Similarly, social anthropology and sociology of Nepal about India consisted of issues like Euro-American influences. On the other, Indian anthropology studies of other Western cultures is found to be as important as South Asian cultures. Sarkar explains that the discipline of anthropology in the West devoted itself to the study of “simple and primitive societies – societies and cultures to which the researchers never belonged” (p. 59-60). Therefore, studying other cultures – whether the study of Western cultures or any of the South Asian cultures – fostered the force and cause of the unity of mankind. The author reflects upon the lack of initiatives taken by any academic institutions or higher government agencies to frame a platform for the scholars of India and Nepal in particular, and those of South Asia in general, to foster the cause of unity of mankind. The phrase “tunneled disciplinary vision” (p. 72) is used to express an absence of methodological innovation and an ineptness of theoretical framework in the anthropological/sociological study of India and Nepal. The author attempts to present thematic content of Indian anthropology in relation to Nepal Studies with an aim to study Nepal subjectively and not in stereotypes. 

Assessing the anthropological/sociological studies of India on Nepal and vice versa, the author proposes a dialogic anthropology. According to Sarkar, “Dialogic anthropology can aspire to grow only when anthropologists from South Asia would agree to engage with each other as co-producers of knowledge” (p. 76). Here the idea is drawn toward interconnectedness with people along with the study of geo-political lands. He offers a vision of “pluriversal commitment” (p. 77) to encourage engagement of multiple national anthropologists encountering both, as Sarkar writes, meaningful and multiple subjectivities in the research. The book offers a discourse embracing “regional imagining” (p. 99) and reorientation of nation-states through meaningful dialogues across state cultures. The author takes on Said’s concept of ‘traveling theory’ and Bhambra’s ‘connected sociologies’ to illustrate the possibility of connecting social anthropology between India and Nepal. Overall, the book offers readers and anthropological/sociological researchers an alternative epistemic framework, a renewal of methodologies, and a pluriversal dialogic discourse to understand the self and the other. The title of the book evidently suggests that it aims at connecting India-Nepal in South Asian anthropological studies. The book is to be studied as a discourse in itself, attempting to present to us new methodologies in our social anthropological study of states concerning South Asia.