Is Post-colonial Anthropology Possible?

The Underdevelopment of Anthropology

in Pakistan.
 2

Introduction:
I would like to highlight in this paper whether or not anthropology is inherently

linked to colonialism? How anthropology and colonialism have helped each other in

furthering themselves? I would also try to deconstruct the notion of native anthropologist,

is there such a thing? and if so, whether the native anthropologist is the solution in

representing the “Self”. Finally taking the example of Pakistan I would like to analyze as

to why anthropology still remains underdeveloped as compared to the rest of the social

sciences in the country.

In order to correlate different aspects, I would start the paper by defining, what is

meant by the term colonialism? Moving onto giving a brief history of the discipline of

anthropology, and the branches within it looking at anthropology in Britain especially

social anthropology and who were the early pioneers in making this into a recognized

discipline in universities. I would then try to link both, the concepts of colonialism and

anthropology, trying to see whether there were links between both or not. Finally, looking

at some recent critiques to the discipline itself in the first part of the paper. Then moving

on to the second theme of the paper Indigenous Anthropology and Native Anthropologist.

Is there such a thing? and if so then, whether the native anthropologists are well equipped

to tackle the contemporary issues facing there own societies and giving home based

solutions. In the parts to follow I would briefly look at the post-colonial anthropology and

finally concluding my argument and the paper on Pakistan, as to see why anthropology

has not developed in to a recognized discipline in major universities.

 3

Colonialism:
People in the world since beginning of life are in search for some order; order is a

process of identifying things, without order there would be chaos in the world. It is a way

of putting things in a systematic order. This ordering is a form of classification. This

search for classification leads to the concept of power, which distinguishes between one

from others. The natural instinct of human beings is to survive and propagate oneself,

who has power, controls the resources and this has given rise to Colonialism. The

literature written on colonialism is by far enormous and has been discussed for many

years in academia, but yet there is no specific definition of the phenomenon. The claim

Horvarth makes about ‘Western scholars had failed to come to grips with colonialism and

imperialism’, by this he was only applying that there is room for much more research on

the concept of colonialism. (Ronald, 1972, pp 45-57).

Colonialism has been a major part of the world human history, many nations were

colonized in the hand of the colonizers. Colonialism, as defined is a form of control over

others and according to the Marxist-Leninist approach it is a form of ‘exploitation’.

Human history is full of exploitation, and it has been a part of human nature and is not

only reserved for the civilized to exploit the others, this process is happening from pre-

history. There are many examples of colonialism, the British rule of Africa and parts of

Asia, along with the French and the Dutch to name a few. (Horvath, 1972,pp.46).
 4

‘Colonialism - it has either been a dirty business engaged in by evil people or a

praiseworthy endeavor undertaken by fine gentlemen for the noble purpose of saving the

wretched, the savage, the unfortunate’. (Horvarth, 1972, pp. 45).

Colonialism, as the literal meaning of the term ended long ago, but in my opinion

it has taken different form now. New players have emerged from the post-World War and

post-colonial periods in the shape of ‘Superpowers’. The institutes that were established

in order to create balance in the world have either failed in delivering what they promised

or have partnered with the powerful. A new form of colonialism has emerged after the

Second World War in the world and countries are now divided on the basis of their

economics.

Anthropology:

According to the definition in Oxford dictionary, anthropology is the ‘study of

mankind, its society and customs’. (Oxford, Dictionary, 1996). There are four major sub-

fields within anthropology, namely, Physical Anthropology, Cultural or Social

Anthropology as it is mostly known in Britain, Archaeology and Linguistics. Each sub-

branch of anthropology has developed itself into a specialized field of its own.

In Britain during the last century the development of anthropology has occurred in

four phases as described by Ahmed and Shore in The Future of Anthropology. The first

phase was that the type of armchair anthropologists and evolutionists like Herbert
 5
Spencer, Lewis Henry Morgan, Sir James Frazer, Sir Edward Tylor to name a few.

Followed by classical anthropologists like, Malinowski and Radcliff Brown, Evans-

Pritchard, Firth, Fortes, Richards, Leach in UK Kroeber, Mead and Benedict in USA. It

was they who transformed the field of anthropology by introducing the concept of

‘participant observation’ as a technique for pure anthropology. Later in the paper, I

discuss Malinowski and other anthropologists especially from Britain and try to correlate

it within the wider framework anthropology linkage with colonialism. The third phase

was of the cold war era, when the world witnessed the assertion of the ‘Superpowers’, the

American and Soviet. This was basically the time when the world was divided into two

types: the western and the communist. The last Phase is that of the post-war, post-

colonial, post-cold war and this ‘post-something’ as Ahmed puts it; this is the one in

which we are in at the moment. (Ahmed, 1995, pp19).

Anthropology links with Colonialism:

I would like to start by shedding some light on the basis of empirical evidences

about the aspect of anthropology being directly linked to colonialism. This is somewhat

true but not entirely as many anthropologists themselves argue that the relationship was

not present between the two, and if it was the relationship was a very weak one.

Anthropology in Britain from its humble beginning tried to pursue that the

discipline of anthropology had a scientific base and argued that it can used best by the

colonial administration to understand the local communities better which were part of the

colonial empire. The reason to portray the importance of anthropological knowledge, was

duly because the colonial governments had the monetary resources at the time and the
 6
power to let anthropologists do their specialize work in these colonies. Another

important factor was that anthropology still had to prove the importance of itself as a

recognized and professional discipline in universities. Many anthropologists argued in

order to get recognition for anthropology itself that anthropological knowledge is

specially needed for those who would directly be involved in colonial administration and

some short courses and diplomas did start in universities in Oxford, Cambridge and

London. Sometimes other institutes also collaborated besides the Royal Anthropological

Institute, such as the Folklore Society and the British Association. (Kuper, 1996,

Mitchell, 1971).

The colonial government did not see the importance of anthropology for the

colonial officers, instead the government insisted that more training should be given in

language, accounting and surveying techniques, as that was very much required. Most

publications that were being published by the colonial governments contained far too

little information on the types of power relations and other important aspects of the

community, which they ruled. Surprisingly on the contrary the missionaries’ notes and

their knowledge of the local language and customs superseded that of the colonial

officers. (Kuper, 1996, Pels, 1995).

It was until 1930’s when the colonial governments decided to uplift the colonies

economically, and planning was done in order stabilize the infrastructure of these

colonies. With this new direction and thinking many new institutes were formed and

money was granted for the ones already in place and this gave anthropology the impetus

it needed to become an established discipline. Lord Hailey, an important advocate for the
 7
need of social and scientific research was given money to conduct survey research in

Africa by the British government. As a result the International African Institute got some

money, Rhodes-Livingstone Institute, International Institute of African and Languages

and Cultures was formed to name a few. The act of 1940, the Colonial Development and

Welfare Act was the result of the relationship of the colonizer and the colonized and the

efforts of Lord Hailey. This enabled many field researches to be conducted especially by

Malinowski and Radcliff Brown whom with the funding that was available to them gave

British anthropology the boast it needed.

The colonial governments did recruit some anthropologists later during the

colonial period; these social anthropologists were either working at some newly

established research institutes or some universities at the time. The purpose for these

recruitments of anthropologists were to provide information to the colonial officers

through the critical approaches of the discipline which would in turn help the colonial

governments in running the government machinery within these colonise. But many

anthropologists argue like Professor Seligman that as he worked in east Africa, for the

colonial government of Sudan, he was not once in his career and work, was asked for any

sort of advice by the colonial officers on the daily matters of the government. (Gulliver,

1985, Peter, 1997).

British anthropology as a result of these transitions started to emerge as a

recognized discipline within universities after the First World War through the efforts of

Malinowski and Radcliff Brown. The insurgency in many parts of the colonized world

had already started and anthropologists thought that these changes would eventually

change the future role of anthropology in the years to follow. Anthropologists took full
 8
advantage of the time that was available, and tried to document as many societies as

possible shortly after the post Second World War period. (Asad, 1973). The links of

anthropology is hard to dismiss, as British social anthropology did have strong

relationship with the colonial government and within this era many institutes were

formed with the help of the colonial government.

Critique of the Discipline. (Relevance of Anthropology, Colonialism

Roots, Study of the Exotic).

In the days to follow after the post-colonial period, a lot of critique of the

discipline was done. In late 1960’s Cohen suggested as cited by Spencer “In a real way

the subject matter of anthropology has been the study of the colonized”. (Spencer, 1997,

pp.2). Ethnography, which became famous after ‘Malinowski’s field study in Melanesia’

(Ahmed, 1995, pp18) and is the base of participant observation method and field study

was considered by many a derivative of colonial intelligence reports as compared to

scientific data which the historians of anthropology argue. (Peter, 1997).

In times to follow there was a shift in thinking of the discipline, to let go of its

colonial past and look at the world and the contemporary issues within it. Presently the

discipline is focusing on different direction and if it has to maintain its integrity in the

world of academia, it has to keep apace with these changes and to look for the real

reasons that is effecting this fast changing world. (Ahmed, 1995, Pels, 1997). The

problem anthropology had was due to its colonial past, when the colonial governments

did not paid attention on the works of anthropologists. They continued doing their work
 9
within the colonies, and gave little attention on studying change. According to Sir

Phillip Mitchell the problem with anthropologist was that they were so engrossed in

studying the native and did not focus on the changing conditions within the colonies.

They tried to give the exact and detailed account of the people. The colonial government

and the officers were not interested in this, as it did not help the colonial officers in their

daily day to day working of the government. (Kuper, 1996). It is now increasingly

difficult and impossible with the changing world, to find a native culture in isolation to

whom Malinowski referred to as ‘Savage’ or ‘Primitive’ or to look for some ‘Exotic’

paradise.

In this new and fluid world, which is changing rapidly and with competition

anthropology is facing from other social sciences, current affairs, psychology, journalism

and literature, it has to change itself and come up with new techniques to tackle the

contemporary issues of the World. It is not that anthropologists are not capable of

answering various issues, like, HIV, Terrorism, Ethnic, Cleansing, and War. Perhaps they

are in a better position and well quipped, to give practical solution with their

understanding of culture change. (Ahmed, 1995, also see Asad, 1973). It can be said that

anthropology has changed due to the rapid changes occurred specially after the Second

World War and is still happening in the world. The contemporary issues are a reality and

exotic paradise and culture is fast becoming a myth. The world of anthropology has to

come up with viable solutions for these realistic problems.

 10
The concept of Orientalism:

It is difficult to judge whether colonialism helped anthropology or anthropology

gave the excuse for the colonial powers to expand colonialism. In an excuse to document

these ‘indigenous forms of life that would otherwise be lost to prosperity’ (Asad, 1973,

pp-17). This again leads us to the point of power relations, the difference of

representation one and the other, this misinterpretation and trying to label the other as

‘Orient’. It is the images of the other through the eyes of the Europeans. It was an excuse

of taking control of others for domination, to feel superior to others and labelling their

societies static and inferior, it is basically giving a wrong description of others whom you

are studying or writing about just to prove your dominance. This concept is strongly

linked to the concept of colonialism. To identify objects that appeal to them as different

and exotic, and to put them in Musems. (Asad, 1973, Said 1978).

II

Indigenous Anthropology:

‘Indigenous Anthropology’ this was the theme that was highly discussed

during the Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research Symposium, 20

participants from 17 countries met at Burg Wartenstein, Austria, July 15-24, 1978. The

purpose of the symposium was to have a dialogue between the western and non-western

in particular third world anthropologists. (Fahim, 1979, pp. 397). Now days especially

this concept is on the rise, not only in the non-western world but also in western world.

What is meant by indigenous anthropology? Is it looking at some indigenous people in

 11
their own primitive setting? Well many and also in my view, indigenous anthropology

can be best described as the anthropology of the Self. One may ask why it is necessary

now; why is it relevant? There are more questions than answers.

There are many reasons to why this is happening in the world especially now.

Post-colonialism, the rise of the nation states, the changing global balance of power,

globalization, the economic state of the world, terrorism to name a few. These changes

have occurred due to the changing world, many countries have now become cautious of

the irregularities of power relations especially after the post-colonial time. It is now

become more difficult for the western anthropologists to do field research in the countries

with a colonial past. Anthropologists still have difficulty in clearing the relationship of

colonialism with anthropology. Along with this lack of funds and most importantly local

interests within ones society has changed the direction for an anthropologists to conduct

‘anthropology at home’. (Fahim, 1979, Fahim & Helmer, 1980, Kim, 1990, also see

Jackson, 1987).

It is still a budding concept in its own, and anthropology still has some difficulty

in coming to terms with this new phenomenon in my opinion. Indigenous anthropology

should be given its equal share in western literature to that of its counterpart, so that it can

gain is righteous place as a true and pure anthropology. (Kim, 1990)

Who is a Native Anthropologist?

‘They cannot represent themselves, they must be represented’ Karl Marx, as citied

by Said. (Said, 1978). This statement is redundant more or less now, as more and more
 12
people today can do the opposite of what Karl Marx said. As Frankenberg points out,

‘these natives can speak for themselves’ cited by Ahmed. To a surprise many of these

natives would be educated with university degrees and some might have a degree up to

Phd. level and very well be an anthropologist. (Ahmed, 1995, pp.19).

More and more anthropologists especially those who belong to the third world as

compared to western anthropologist are trying to work within their own people. To come

up with solution in accordance to their knowledge of local beliefs and needs as compared

to that of a western anthropologist, and provide solutions on issues facing their nations.

(Fahim, 1980, also see, Bateson, 1978).

There are many problems associated with the concept of a native anthropologist,

‘How native is a native anthropologist?(Narayan, 1993, pp.671) How a native

anthropologist can help? This and many other questions arise when we deconstruct the

notion of a native anthropologist. There are many advantages and constraints of being a

native anthropologist.

Objectivity, the very basis of anthropology is the first aspect that might be

threatened as it is believed that the native anthropologists will tend to loose it when they

are working within their own backyards. But on the other hand, the native anthropologists

would have some advantages as well, they would comparatively have a better insight of

the culture. They do not have to overcome the barrier of language, they are on familiar

terrain and are in a better position in equating the problems within the local settings.

Similarly the native anthropologist, as compared to that of his counterpart is supposed to

 13
know which questions to ask in which surrounding as compared to the ‘rude

anthropologists’ by Cohen cited by Fahim and Helmer, as may only be forgiven because

they do not know the customs. Sometimes even for a native anthropologist it becomes

difficult to work in their own setting, as people do not take them seriously, or do not give

them the exact picture as they think the native as being a native should know about the

particular aspect. (Fahim & Helmer, 1980, Strathern 1987, Kim, 1990).

The native, is a questionable term by itself, whom to be called a native, a person,

one who is only of the same colour, and creed. The absence of the native anthropologist

for a long time from his place of origin and the changes that has occurred during the time

he was away, and the problems he may face are similar to that faced by a foreign

anthropologist. (Kim, 1990).

The native anthropologists can play an important part in many ways as a learned

professional for a foreign anthropologist and can replace the local educated informant.

The native anthropologists can also put things right, by re-analyzing the theories made by

western anthropologists. And most importantly the native anthropologist can bridge the

gap and remove the misconception created by the western media on local issues to name

a few. (Kim, 1990 also see Ahmed, 1995). According to Ahmed, in his article Defining

Islamic Anthropology, as a practicing anthropologist and seeing the non-natives were

practicing various types of rituals. It had given him a better and a clear understanding of

his own people and society with a wider framework of the anthropology and to

understand the world and its people more clearly. (Ahmed, 1984).
 14

III

Looking at PostColonial Anthropology?

It has been difficult until now for anthropology to shake off the relationship it had

with colonialism. The growth of the discipline did get a push that was required with the

help of colonialism. To look at the development of Anthropology is sometimes put as

looking at the development of Colonialism itself. (Spencer, 1997). In my opinion,

although post-colonial anthropology did flourish, but it was a result of the initial push it

got from the colonial ties it had with it. American universities also developed strong

anthropology departments and other research institutes and worked more on the ‘Red-

Indians’ as the Native American were called initially.

Anthropology, as a discipline did not flourish, in other colonial powers that was

sharing the world along with Britain during the era of colonialism.(Kuper, 1996). It can

be said that anthropology managed to flourish in only those countries who either during

the British colonialism got some institutes setup within them or had some tribal past.

Africa and India, both have anthropology as a recognized discipline in major universities

and institutes. India, especially with the caste system, developed a strong interest in the

field of Anthropology. The University of Calcutta was the first university in India to

incorporate anthropology as a subject in 1920, and it was through the efforts of the then

colonial government. (Iyer & Ratnam, 1961 Sarana & Sinha, 1976).
 15

IV

The Underdevelopment of anthropology as a discipline

in Pakistan compared to other social sciences.

The History of the Anthropology:

Anthropology, as a recognized discipline in Pakistan, is only offered in Quaid-e-

Azam University, Islamabad. Others universities like the University of Punjab and

University of Karachi, both offer Anthropology as only an optional course in its Masters

course, in the MA Sociology Program. The sub-field of Anthropology namely

Archaeology, only one or two separate department is present. Mostly in other universities

it has been merged within the Department of General History. In some private,

universities, namely, The Hamdard Univeristy and The Aga Khan University, only one

course of Anthropology is taught and that being offered only as an elective. So in general

the only Department of Anthropology is in Quaid-e-Azam University, Islamabad, with

the Head of Department being Dr. Naveed-I-Rahat. (Sussex University Alumni). The

department awards MA, MPhil and PhD in Anthropology. The total number of faculty is

8, out of which 4 have PhD degrees and the rest have a Master degree in Anthropology.

(Hashmi, 1989, Zaidi, 1989).

 16
The State of other Social Sciences in Pakistan: (Reasons).

In Pakistan, the subjects that come under the umbrella of social sciences are Political

Science, History, Sociology, Economics, Anthropology, International Relations,

Demography, Pakistan Studies, and Area Studies.

The present dismal states of social sciences in Pakistan are due to many factors. I

would just like to mention some here. Lack of democracy in the country. The country

since the time it has been created, till now has been switching between civilian and

military governments. Another important reason is the economic situation of the country

and its dependency on the agencies like the World Bank, IMF. The lack of universities

and research institutes in Pakistan. The overall literacy rate of 18% of the total urban

population. The only field, which has shown some improvement, is economics, as

Pakistan being an underdeveloped country has focused much of the available resources in

economic planning and economic education. The total numbers of big universities are

only in the major cities of Karachi, Islamabad and Lahore. Due to Pakistan Strategic

position, and with tensions with India over Kashmir, Defence leaving only 2% for

education and uses up the majority of the annual budget. Due to the changing pattern of

the world, since the time of its creation Pakistan had strong military and economics ties

with US. This was the time, when famous economists have partnered with research

institutes and even have taught in Pakistani universities, but now it has changed. Local

Infrastructure. Domestic ethnic tensions within the Sunnis and the Shais. The rise of

unemployment and crime rate. These and many other factors have not yet let Pakistan to

take off not only in education or social sciences, but also over all as a country. ( Hashmi,

1989, Zaidi, 1989).

 17

Conclusion:
In this paper I have tried to see the relationship of colonialism to anthropology. It can

be concluded that anthropology is still trying to come out of the shadow of colonialism.

The discipline of anthropology is coming to terms with the changing world and is

learning from its mistakes and trying to cope up with the contemporary issues of the

world. In order for anthropology to survive in this world as a strong discipline which is

being challenged by other social sciences, journalism etc it has to come up with viable

and construct solution to different domestic problems.

I have also tried to deconstruct the notion of the Native Anthropologists. In my

opinion the native anthropologists do exists and it is they who are in better positions, to

give practical solution for the national problems and can represent the self better with

better knowledge as being both a pure and a native anthropologist. Finally, about the state

of the social sciences in Pakistan, it can only be said, there is a need for change within the

country. I think the native anthropologist should identify the root cause of issues that the

country is being faced with besides economic and can give viable solutions.
 18
Biblography:

Ahmed, A. & Chore, S. eds (1995) The Future of Anthropology – Its relevance to the

contemporary world. The Athlone Press, University of London.

Ahmed, A. (1984). Defining Islamic Anthropology. Royal Anthropological

InstituteNews (RAIN). No. 85. pp2, London.

Asad, T. ed. (1973). Introduction to Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter.

London: Ithaca Press.

Brown, R. (1979). “Passages in the life of a White Anthropologist: Max Gluckman in

Northern Rhodesia”. Journal of African History. 20: 525-541.

Fahim, H & Helmer, K. (1980). Indigenous Anthropology in Non-Western Countries:

A Further Elaboration. Current Anthropology. Vol. 21. No. 5. 644-663.

Fahim, H. (1979). Indigenous Anthropology in Non-Western Countries. Current

Anthropology. Vol. 21. No. 5. 644-663.

Gulliver, P.H. (1985). “An applied anthropologists in East Africa during the colonial

era” pp. 37-57 of Grillo, R., Rew, A. (eds.) Social anthropology and development

policy. London: Tavistock.

 19
Hashmi, S.H. ed. (1989). The State of Social Science in Pakistan. Islamabad,

Allama Iqbal Open University.

Iyer, L.A. & Ratnam, L.A. (1961). Anthropology in India. Bombay, Bharatiya Vidya

Bhavan.

Jackson, A. (1987). Anthropology at Home. London, New York: Tavistock

Publication.

Kim, Choong, S. (1990). The Role of the Non-Western Anthropologists

Reconsidered: Illusion versus Reality. Current Anthropology. Vol.31. No. 2. 196-201.

Kuper, A. (1996). Anthropology and Anthropologists:The modern British School

1922-72. London: Allen Lane. (Third Edition), pp.99-120.

Mitchell, P. (1971). “ The Anthropologists and the Practical Man: A Reply and a

Question”. Africa. 3(2): 217-223.

Narayan, K. (1993). How Native Is a “Native” Anthropologists? American

Anthropologists. Vol. 95, No. 3. pp 671-686.

Peter, P. (1997). The Anthropology of Colonialism: Culture, History, and the

Emergence of Western Govermentality. Annual Reiew of Anthropology. 26:163-183.

 20
Ronald, J Horvath. (1972). A Definition of Colonialism. Current Anthropology,

Vol.13, No.1, pp. 45-57.

Said, Edward, W. (1978). Orientalism. London: Penguin Books Ltd.

Sarana, G & Sinha, P. (1976). Status of Social-Cultural Anthropology in India.

Annual Review of Anthropology. Vol.5 pp. 209.225.

Shimkin, Demitri. B, Tax, S. & Morrison, John. W. eds. (1978). Anthropology for the

Future. Illinios: Department of Anthropology.

Spencer, J. (1997). Post-Colonialism and the Political Imagination. The Journal of

the Royal Anthropological Institute. Vol.3. No.1. (pp.1-19).

Zaidi, S,A. (1989). The Dismal State of the Social Sciences in Pakistan. Islamabad,

Allama Iqbal University.