Course Contents

Page Nos.
BLOCK 1 NATURE AND SCOPE OF SOCIOLOGY 5

Unit 1 Emergence of Sociology and Social Anthropology 7

BLOCK 2 RELATIONSHIP OF SOCIOLOGY WITH 21

OTHER SOCIAL SCIENCES

Unit 2 Relationship of Sociology with Anthropology 23

Unit 3 Relationship of Sociology with Psychology 35
Unit 4 Relationship of Sociology with History 46
Unit 5 Relationship of Sociology with Economics 57
Unit 6 Relationship of Sociology with Political Science 69

BLOCK 3 BASIC CONCEPTS 81

Unit 7 Culture and Society 83

Unit 8 Social Groups and Community 97
Unit 9 Organisations and Institutions 111
Unit 10 Status and Role 122
Unit 11 Socialisation 135
Unit 12 Structure and Function 147
Unit 13 Social Control and Change 160

FURTHER READINGS 173

GLOSSARY 176
COURSE INTRODUCTION
This course is a broad introduction to the discipline of sociology. It familiarizes
the students with the history of the development of Sociology, its relationship
with related disciplines of the social sciences and some of the fundamental
concepts and concerns of the discipline.

There are three blocks and thirteen Units (Chapters) in this course. The first
Block which is titled “Nature and Scope of Sociology” deals with the emergence
of Sociology and Social Anthropology. Block 2 which is titled “Relationship of
Sociology with Other Social Sciences” discusses the relationship of Sociology
with other Social Sciences, specifically, with Anthropology, Psychology, History,
Economics and Political Science. It has five Units. Block 3 titled “Basic Concepts”
explains some of the basic concepts used in Sociology. They comprise “Culture
and Society”, “Social Groups and Community”, “Organizations and Institutions”,
“Status and Role”, “Socialisation”, “Structure and Function”, and “Social Control
and Change”.

In order to help the learner to comprehend the text, the Units have been arranged
thematically under successive blocks. The Units under each Block have also
been structured in order to help the learner. Every Unit begins with the “Structure”
of the Unit and is followed by “Objectives”, “Introduction”, main content,
Summary (“Let us sum up”), and “References”. In order to make it engaging,
exercises are inserted as “check your progress” wherever required. This exercise
could also be useful as sample questions in examination point of view. The other
important components for better comprehension of the Units are “further reading”
and “glossary” which are appended at the end of the course.
 Block 1
Nature and Scope of Sociology
Nature and Scope of Sociology

6
 Emergence of Sociology and
UNIT 1 EMERGENCE OF SOCIOLOGY AND Social Anthropology

SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY*
Structure
1.0 Objectives
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Emergence of Sociology
1.2.1 The Enlightenment Period
1.2.2 The Scientific Revolution
1.3 Social and Economic Changes that swept 19th Century European Society
1.3.1 French Revolution
1.3.2 Industrial Revolution
1.4 The Rise of Sociological Theory
1.5 Emergence of Social Anthropology
1.5.1 First Phase of Development
1.5.2 Second Phase of Development
1.6 Emergence of Modern Social Anthropology
1.7 Pioneers of Social Anthropology
1.8 Let Us Sum Up
1.9 Check Your Progress
1.10 References

1.0 OBJECTIVES
After reading this Unit, you will be able to understand;
• Emergence of Sociology;
• Factors for the emergence of Sociology;
• Rise of Sociological Theories;
• Emergence of Social Anthropology;
• Phases of the development of Social Anthropology;
• Pioneers of Social Anthropology; and
• Emergence of Modern Social Anthropology.

1.1 INTRODUCTION
Sociology and social anthropology are closely related in many aspects. In fact,
social anthropology is the closest discipline of sociology. Sometimes, it is rather
difficult to differentiate sociology from social anthropology in some areas of
enquiry and methodology. Both the disciplines are relatively young even within
the social sciences. Despite similarities, the emergence of sociology and social
anthropology has diverse historical roots. Although, social anthropology is said
to have emerged somewhat earlier than sociology, from the very beginning it

* This unit is contributed by R. Vashum, IGNOU and Anusha Batra, Research Scholar, IGNOU 7
Nature and Scope of Sociology was very difficult to differentiate between the subject matters of the two
disciplines. While the emergence of sociology is relatively easier to trace, the
emergence of social anthropology (or for that matter ‘Integrated Anthropology’
including physical anthropology) is more complex. Both the disciplines trace
back to several centuries ago; however, both emerged only in the 19 th century as
an academic discipline. As we go through the Unit, we shall find the varying
historical developments of the emergence of the two disciplines.

1.2 EMERGENCE OF SOCIOLOGY

In order to understand the emergence of sociology as a social science discipline,
it is imperative to understand the socio-economic, political and scientific factors.

Western Europe, in the 18th-19th centuries witnessed rapid and profound changes.
This led to a paradigm shift to the understanding of society and also of the
individual’s place in it. Considerable advances were taking place in terms of
scientific discovery and scientific methodology. Natural sciences, though still in
nascent stages, began developing ‘systematic’ methods for study of the physical
world. The question that occupied the minds of early sociologists like Comte
and Durkheim was, could a similar scientific and systematic approach be applied
to the study if the human social world?

Scientific and technological advances led to the transformation from a traditional

rural agrarian society to a modern urban industrial society. Due to new inventions
as we will study later, the scale of production changed from small home-based
to large-scale factory like enterprises. Alongside such developments there were
also widespread social, economic and political changes that had a profound effect
on West European societies, including major political upheavals.

These extensive changes, though central to the process of industrialisation and

modernisation, rather created a paradoxical situation. Paradoxical because it was
marked by hope and despair simultaneously. Hope because of the transformation
of social, economic, cultural and political aspects of life from an erstwhile
traditional society towards what was viewed as rational and enlightened
philosophy, especially with reference to the rule of the Church in the Dark Ages.
Yet, this ‘modern’ society that fostered human creativity and rationality was in a
perpetual state of disarray and chaos as the earlier stable orders were being
replaced by new ones. Sociology, as a distinct discipline emerged in the
background of these intellectual and material/social changes taking place in the
latter half of the 19th century. We shall discuss some the factors which contributed
to the emergence of sociology as an academic discipline.

1.2.1 Enlightenment
The Enlightenment or the ‘Age of Reason’ was a period of intellectual
development which brought about significant changes in philosophical thought
in Europe in the 18th century. Many existing ideas and beliefs, relating to social
life, were overthrown and replaced during this period. The most prominent
thinkers associated with the Enlightenment were the French philosophers Charles
Montesquieu and Jean Jacques Rousseau.
This period marked a radical change from the then existing philosophies of feudal
8 Europe. The social and moral orders were no longer considered as divinely
ordained and sacrosanct. Individuals became increasingly rational and critical. Emergence of Sociology and
Social Anthropology
Departing from the age old Divine Right Theory of the Ruler, now nothing was
considered sacrosanct – from the church to the state to the authority of the
monarch, nothing was now infallible.

The roots of such ideas, as the belief that both nature and society can be studied
empirically, that human beings are essentially rational and that such a society
built on rational principles will make human beings realize their infinite potentials,
was seen as a result of the Industrial and Scientific Revolutions, which got
firmly established during the period which witnessed the French and the American
Revolutions.

1.2.2 The Scientific Revolution

Europe produced a ‘scientific revolution’ in the Renaissance period of fourteenth
to sixteenth century which was marked by a new attitude towards man and
nature. Natural objects became the subject of close observation and
experiment. The impact of this revolution was crucial therefore, not just
in changing material life, but also the ideas which people held about Nature and
Society. 

Some major developments of this Scientific Revolution were Copernican

Revolution and the movement towards a heliocentric theory from the previous
geocentric one; the ushering of the age of experiments scientists like Galileo
Galilei, Johannes Kepler and Isaac Newton that revolutionised science and led
to a growing desire of sociologists to build a science of society modelled on the
scientific method. Also, Darwin’s evolutionary theory posed a radical critique of
the Biblical theory of Genesis. Herbert Spencer had introduced the notion of
evolution prior to Darwin and the French philosophers like Comte had described
the evolution of society, but Darwin provided legitimate scientific proof for human
biological evolution. This led to development of evolutionary theory of society
wherein, not just organisms, but societies were seen as constantly evolving or
developing from a lower to a higher stage.

The dissection of human body, which began to be performed only Post-

Renaissance, helped people better understand the functioning of the human body.

All this led to challenging of the old ideas and suggestion of alternatives. These
alternatives, however, were only accepted if they could be proved and repeatedly
verified, else new solutions were sought. Scientific method, therefore, became
regarded as an accurate and objective method.

1.3 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHANGES THAT

SWEPT 19TH CENTURY EUROPEAN
SOCIETY
1.3.1 French Revolution 
The French Revolution of 1789 marked a turning point in the history of human
struggle for ‘liberty, fraternity and equality’. It put an end to the age of feudalism
and ushered in a new order of society. An important contribution of this revolution
was the far reaching changes that it brought, not only French society, but in 9
Nature and Scope of Sociology societies throughout Europe. Even distant countries in other continents such as,
India, were influenced by the ideas generated during this revolution. Ideas like
liberty, fraternity and equality, which now form a part of the preamble to the
Constitution of India, owe their origin to the French Revolution.

France, like other European countries during the eighteenth century, had entered
the age of reason and rationalism. Major philosophers, whose ideas influenced
the French people, were rationalists who believed that’ all true things could be
proved by reason’. Some of these thinkers were, Montesquieu (1689-1755), Locke
(1632-1704), Voltaire(1694-1778), and Rousseau (1712-1778).The ferment
created by these ideas along with the prevailing social conditions in the French
society led to the French Revolution which marked an end of despotic monarchy.
It changed the political structure of European society and replaced the age of
feudalism by heralding the arrival of liberal democracy.

The long series of political revolutions that were ushered in by the French
Revolution in 1789 and carried over through the nineteenth century was the most
immediate factor in the rise of sociological theorizing. The impact of these
revolutions on many societies was enormous, and led to many positive
changes. However, what attracted the attention of many early theorists were not
the positive consequences but the negative effects of such radical changes.

These writers were particularly disturbed by the resulting chaos and disorder,

especially in France and wanted to restore order in the society. Some of the more
extreme thinkers of this period literally wanted a return to the peaceful and
relatively orderly days of the Middle Ages. The more rational thinkers recognized
that social change had made such a return impossible. Thus they sought instead
to find new bases of order in societies that had been overturned by the political
revolutions of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This interest in the issue
of social order was one of the major concerns of classical sociological
theorists, especially Comte, Durkheim, and Parsons. 

Another development of the late 18th and early 19th century, which also greatly
shaped up the context for Sociology to emerge was the Industrial Revolution.
The early sociologists were greatly disturbed by the changes taking place in the
society with the onset of industrialisation, which, with its massive rural to urban
migration changed patterns of living, hardened an exploitative class structure-
all such themes which rose questions fundamental to the development of many
sociological theories like Karl Marx’s critique to Capitalism.

1.3.2 Industrial Revolution

The Industrial Revolution was not a single event but refers to a set of inter-
related developments that led to the transformation of the western world from a
largely agrarian system to an overwhelmingly industrial one. It began around
1760 A.D. in England and brought about great changes in the social and economic
life of the people, initially in England, and later spread to other countries of
Europe. In Europe, especially England, the discovery of new
territories, explorations, growth of trade and commerce and the consequent growth
of towns brought about an increase in demand for goods. Within this system, a
few profited greatly while the majority worked long hours and for a paltry amount
of money.
10
During Industrial Revolution, new tools and techniques were invented, which Emergence of Sociology and
Social Anthropology
could produce goods on a large-scale. Spinning Jenny, invented in 1767 by James
Hargreaves, led to speeding up of production activity. Arkwright in 1769,
invented another tool, called Arkwright’s Water Fame which was so large that it
could not be kept in one’s home and a special building was required to set it
up. On account of this, it is often said that the factory system was introduced.

This led to a change in economy from a feudal to a capitalist system of production.

Subsequently, a new class of capitalists emerged who controlled this new system
of production. Due to this revolution society moved from the old age of hand-
made goods to the new age of machine-made goods. This shift heralded the
emergence of Industrial Revolution. 

Impact of the Industrial Revolution on Society 

With the change in the economy, several changes in the society followed. As
capitalism became more and more complex, the developments of banks, insurance
companies, and finance corporations took place. New class of industrial workers,
managers, capitalists emerged. The peasants in the new industrial society found
themselves with thousands of other people like themselves, winding cotton in a
textile mill. Instead of the open and bright countryside, they were now living in
dirt and squalor.

With the increase in production, population started increasing. Rise of population

accompanied by massive rural to urban migration led to urbanisation. The
industrial cities grew rapidly. These industrial cities were marked by huge socio-
economic disparities.

These changes concerned both conservative and radical thinkers.

The conservatives feared that such conditions would lead to chaos and disorder,
while radicals like Friedrich Engels felt that the factory workers would initiate
the working class revolution leading to social transformation. Though the
concerns were very different from one another, yet social thinkers of that time
were united in the impact the Industrial Revolution would possibly cause.
They also agreed upon the importance of the new working class.

Thus important themes of the Industrial Revolution, which concerned the early

sociologists were the condition of the labour, transformation of property,
urbanization and technology.

1.4 THE RISE OF SOCIOLOGICAL THEORY

As we saw in the beginning, at the time when sociology was shaping up as a
subject, intellectual ferment was being witnessed in Europe in the form of
Enlightenment. This was a period of remarkable intellectual development and
change in philosophical thought.

Out of the consensus arrived at by the Enlightenment thinkers about the changes
taking place in the society, the chief intellectual precursors that led to the
emergence of Sociology were firstly, the Philosophy of History, that is, recognition
of the fact that society progress in stages (patterns) and that because of the presence
of this pattern, laws to understand society too can be formulated in a scientific
11
Nature and Scope of Sociology and systematic manner, on the lines of natural sciences. Secondly, the emergence
of the quantitative method of Social Survey. As a method of sociological inquiry,
social survey came to be recognised as a tool that could be used to understand
the social problems prevailing in the society and thus find solutions for social
reform.

Conservative Reaction to Enlightenment

However, the influence of the Enlightenment on sociological theory, was not so
much direct and positive, as it was indirect and negative. In fact, Conservative
Reactionists to the Enlightenment like Louis de Bonald (1754-1840) and Joseph
de Maistre(1753-1821) contributed as much to the development of sociology as
did scholars who were influenced by the Enlightenment.

De Bonald was deeply perturbed by the profound and revolutionary changes that
led to the establishment of a highly impersonal urban city life, completely devoid
of any community bonding and advocated a return to the peace and stability of
the previous times.

To that extent, sociology with its emphasis on society as a unit of analysis, rather
than the individual; the recognition of the various parts of the society as inter-
related and inter-dependent; and, stress on ultimate harmony and stability in the
society- can be said to be influenced by the Conservative Reaction.

In fact, it would be appropriate to say that ‘while the goals of sociology have
been influenced by the Conservative thought (harmony, stability and unity), the
methods have been influenced by the Enlightenment thinkers who realised that
though one can’t go back to the past, but can create a better society using a new
knowledge of the society (Scientific Method) (Retzer 2016).

Thus, Enlightenment and Conservative thought combined to create the science

of Sociology. Also, these intellectual stirrings were not isolated from the social
milieu prevailing in 18-19th century Western Europe.

1.5 EMERGENCE OF SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY

The subject matter of anthropology and its academic profession began as an
intersection of natural science and humanities. Social anthropology being part
of anthropology, its emergence has been historically linked with the development
of other components of anthropology. The emergence of social anthropology
has also been closely linked with other disciplines of the social sciences, such as
sociology, philosophy, ethno-history, history, psychology (social psychology),
political science, and economics. But the closest discipline of social anthropology
is sociology.

In view of the highly differentiated subject matter of anthropology, it is rather

difficult to comprehensively locate the strands of intellectual development and
the emergence of the discipline. Like sociology, the emergence and development
of anthropology is said to be directly linked to the scientific development in the
western world. If one considers the existence of the term ‘anthropology’ many
centuries ago, then, “anthropology is a very old subject. Anthropology is a word
12 which the ancient Greeks had also used. To them Anthropologia occurs in 1595.
Immanuel Kant published a book in 1798 entitled Anthropologie in Emergence of Sociology and
Social Anthropology
PragmatischerHinsicht” (Sarana 1983:3). In the 15th and 16th centuries the
Portuguese and Spaniards wrote chronicles of their conquests of parts of Africa
and the New World. These are important anthropological source material. Besides
these, the writings of travelers and others, and Rousseau’s speculations concerning
the noble savage, indicate the change in the intellectual climate. (ibid.). The
foundation of anthropology has also been dated back to the Greco-Roman
renaissance period, particularly beginning with the writings of Herodotus of
Halicarnassus (484-425 B.C.). According to Voget (1975:7), Herodotus “has been
even cited as a likely forerunner, if not the “father,” of ethnography”. In fact,
Herodotus is mainly remembered for his history of the Persian Wars” and the
writings of detailed travel narratives from various parts of western Asia and
Egypt, the Scythians on the northern coast of the Black Sea, the Ethiopians, and
the peoples of the Indus valley (cf. Erikson 2001:2).The Greek philosophers of
the time, particularly, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle also influenced on the study
of man and society. Later, the Roman philosopher Marcus Tullius Cicero also
significantly contributed to the understanding of human society. After a gap of
several centuries some philosophers began to take interest in the study of society
and the state, particularly in the 16th century A.D. Some of these scholars include
Thomas Hobbes and Machiavelli. Prior to this, mention may be made of the
significant contribution of Ibn Khaldun in the 14th century A.D. on the moral-
historical philosophy and structural-functional analysis of social phenomena.

1.5.1 First Phase of Development

By 18 th century A.D. after the experience and influence of the renaissance in
Europe, there were many eminent philosophers who have made immense
contributions to the understanding of society, including Rousseau, Vico, Baron
de Montesquieu and John Locke who dealt with the social phenomena of the
time. These earlier works certainly laid the philosophical foundation for the
development of the social sciences and the science of human society including
sociology and anthropology. The contribution of the earlier philosophers and
scholars has certainly contributed to the emergence and development of
anthropology although they cannot be called anthropology per se. The
development of anthropology and social science which makes departure to the
earlier philosophical and historical studies came in two phases. The first phase
(1725- 1840) “philosopher scientists succeeded in separating the study of man,
society, and civilization from history and thereby formulated a general social
science” (Voget, 1975:41). However, Hoebel (1958) is of the view that
“anthropology stems primarily from natural science and carries a greater measure
of the natural science tradition” (p.9) and not from history or philosophy. The
problem of its earlier association and the nature of anthropology are such that
E.E. Evans-Pritchard even in the mid-20th century had to grapple with the situation
in British Anthropology (particularly social anthropology). On the nature of social
anthropology, he states that “there is a broad division of opinion between those
who regard social anthropology as a natural science and those, like myself [Evans-
Pritchard], who regards it as one of the humanities. This division is perhaps at its
sharpest when relations between anthropology and history are being discussed”
(Evans-Pritchard, 1951:7).
13
Nature and Scope of Sociology 1.5.2 Second Phase of Development
In the second phase (1840-1890) there was “transition in the natural sciences
from a static equilibrium model to a dynamic model. Its culmination came with
the introduction of thermodynamic and Darwinian evolutionary theory” (Voget,
1975:42).With such a diverse field as anthropology, an attempt was made in the
1860s for integrating into a general anthropological discipline that would engage
on the early history of man. By 1870 onward, “a distinctive character of
anthropology began to manifest itself” by unifying physical anthropology,
prehistory and ethnology (cf. ibid.). This period marks the emergence of
anthropology into an academic discipline. It is through the inspiration of the
“triumphs of the scientific method in the physical and organic domain, nineteenth-
century anthropologists believed that socio-cultural phenomena were discoverable
lawful principles. This conviction joined their interests with the aspiration of a
still earlier period, extending back before the social sciences had been named, to
the epochal stirrings of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment and the vision of a
universal history of mankind” (Harris 1979:1). However, it emerged as an
academic discipline only in the nineteenth century. The significant factors for
the emergence of the discipline is however attributed to the various intellectual
and socio-political changes taking place in the 18th and 19th centuries in Europe.
Some of the important influences include the French Revolution and the Industrial
Revolution in Europe.
Fred W. Voget situates the emergence of social/cultural anthropology from the
route of the emergence of social science. He states:
“[T]here can be little doubt that eighteenth-century progressivists laid
the foundations for a new discipline— a generalized social science.
The fact that their general outline for a natural history of mankind was
expanded and refined during the nineteenth century, and served as a
model for an anthropological science of culture, testifies to the
remarkable breakthrough achieved by progressivist social philosopher-
scientists and historians” (1975:88).
Voget, however, points out the caveat that after considering the eminence of the
eighteenth century progressivists as the forerunners of anthropology (social/
cultural anthropology), the progressivists themselves ignored the “collection of
specialized facts”, but “elevated themselves to the rank of social and cultural
theorists. In consequence, they did not have any direct connection with
developments that would lead into prehistory, physical anthropology, linguistics,
and other anthropological specialties. Yet it was the convergence of these
specializations that generated the differentiation of anthropology from the general
social science base… Historic and evolutionary processes had been at work in
the emergence of the anthropological scientific institution” (Voget 1975:89).
Marvin Harris, a historian of anthropological development, also views that
anthropology “began as the science of history” (1979:1).

1.6 EMERGENCE OF MODERN SOCIAL

ANTHROPOLOGY
The emergence of modern social anthropology emerged mainly with the
contribution of Bronislaw Malinowski and A.R. Radcliff-Brown. Marcel Mauss
14 is also generally considered as the pioneer of modern social anthropology in
France. Bronislaw Malinowski is one of the most well-known social Emergence of Sociology and
Social Anthropology
anthropologists. In fact, he is generally regarded as the founder of modern social
anthropology. His main contributions to modern social anthropology was the
introduction of ethnographic method with participant method and/or technique,
and founding of the theory of functionalism departing from the earlier approaches,
particularly, evolutionary and historical approaches. His significant works include
Argonauts of the Western Pacific (1922), Crime and Custom in Savage
Society (1926), A Scientific Theory of Culture and Other Essays (1944). A.R.
Radcliff-Brown is also one of the founders of modern anthropology along with
Bronislaw Malinowski. He is well-known for his theoretical approach, generally
called structural-functionalism. His theory was developed with the conceptual
ideas of Emile Durkheim and his ethnographic field data and experience. His
significant works include The Andaman Islanders: A Study in Social Anthropology
(1922), and Structure and Function in Primitive Society(1952). Marcel Mauss is
regarded as both sociologist and anthropologist. He is well-known for his
comparative study of the relation between forms of exchange and social
structure. This is how he is also considered as the founder of modern social
anthropology in France. His most significant work is The Gift (1922). Along
these pioneers in social anthropology in varied areas, one can include Levi Strauss
into the list for founding the theory of structuralism and structural anthropology.
He is also regarded as one of the most influential thinkers of the 20 th century on
the subjects of myth, culture, religion, and social organization. His significant
works include The Elementary Structures of Kinship (1949),Tristes
Tropiques (1955), and Structural Anthropology (1963).There are also many
anthropologists who contributed to the development of modern social
anthropology, but they come either later or of lower stature.

The emergence of anthropology (social anthropology) as a discipline can also be

reckoned through the formation of professional associations. The aborigines
Protection Society formed in 1837 was the first anthropological association to
be established (cf. Sarana 1983:4).The American Anthropological Association
was established in 1902 (ibid: 4). The American Association for the Advancement
of Science recognized ethnology in 1851 and assigned a separate section for
anthropology in 1882. Anthropology was recognized by the British Association
for the Advancement of Science in 1846 and was accorded a separate department
in 1884. The Anthropological Society of London came into being in 1863. This
and other the Ethnological Society of London were merged to form the
Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland in 1871… In India, the
Asiatic Society of Bengal was founded in the latter half of the 18th century [1774].
The Anthropological Society of Bombay was established in 1886 (ibid: 5). In
the Indian context, there is no consensus that the emergence of anthropology
(including social anthropology) coincides with the formation of Asiatic Society
of Bengal as some would claim. Saranais of the view that Indian anthropology
did not emerge in the 18th century. He opines that the establishment of Associations
and writings till the mid-19th century “were only stray attempts. The generally
recognized anthropological works in India were written by the British
administrators like Blunt, Crook, Dalton, Grierson, Ibbetson, Mills, Nesfield,
O’Malley, Risley, Russel, Senart and Thurston and the administrator-turned
academician, J.H.Hutton, in the latter half of the 19th century… In this century
[20th century], Sarat Chandra Roy added to this corpus of anthropological material
[with] his monographs on the tribes of Chotanagpur” (Sarana 1983: 6-7; brackets
15
Nature and Scope of Sociology are mine). Nevertheless, the formation of these associations indicates an emergent
situation of anthropology (including social anthropology) in different countries
and at different periods.

1.7 PIONEERS OF SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY

The pioneers of social anthropology among others includeLewis Henry Morgan
(1818-1881), John Ferguson McLennan (1827-1881), Adolf Bastian (1826-
1905),and Sir Edward Burnett Tylor (1832-1917). They were soon followed by
anthropologists such as, Franz Boas (1858-1942), Sir James George Frazer (1854-
1941) and W.H.R. Rivers (1864-1922). There are also many other anthropologists
who had made significant contributions to the founding and development of
anthropology, particularly social anthropology.

The important contributions of Henry Lewis Morgan to the development of social

anthropology are among others his study on kinship system from which he
developed the evolutionary stages of society. His important works include Systems
of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family (1871) and Ancient Society
(1877). These two works also greatly influenced Karl Marx to develop his theory
of class and historical materialism. Ferguson McLennan, a Scottish ethnologist
main contribution to the development of social anthropology was the study of
customs based on marriage systems in the pre-literate societies. His book Primitive
Marriage(1865) was a significant contribution to the understanding of marriage
in the pre-literate societies.

John Ferguson McLennan, a Scottish ethnologist, among others made a significant

contribution to the understanding of ‘primitive’ marriage systems, law, totemism,
and kinship. His main anthropological works are Primitive Marriage: An Enquiry
into the Origin of the Form of Capture in Marriage Ceremonies (1865), in which
he also introduced new terms such as ‘exogamy’ and ‘endogamy’, The Patriarchal
Theory (1885), and Studies in Ancient History (1896). Adolf Bastian, a medical-
turned ethnologist (also anthropologist) is regarded as the “Father of German
anthropology”. His well-known book appeared as a “three-volume treatise, Der
Mensch in der Geschichte (1860‘Manin History’) which promoted views on
human psychology and cultural history that shared little common ground with
the evolutionists, who studied a universal movement and ignored the concrete
events of cultural history (Eriksen et al 2001: 27-28;cf. Koepping 1983).He
opposed the idea of biologically distinct races and formulated the principle of
the psychic unity of mankind (ibid: 28).

Sir Edward Burnett Tylor who is generally regarded as the “Founder” or ‘Father
of Cultural Anthropology’ is mainly concerned with theories of cultural evolution
and diffusion, origins of religion and magic. His conceptual definition of ‘culture’
and ‘cultural survivals’are still reckoned till today. He stands out as the most
eminent anthropologist among the pioneers of social/cultural anthropology. Some
of his main works include, Researches into the Early History of Mankind and
the Development of Civilization (1865), Primitive Culture (1871), and
Anthropology: An Introduction to the Study of Man and Civilization (1881).

Franz Boas who is regarded as the “Father of American Anthropology”

(particularly cultural anthropology) and also of the founder of “Modern
American Anthropology”. Some of his main contributions to anthropology
16
 Emergence of Sociology and
were— the rejection of the evolutionary approach to the understanding of Social Anthropology
culture which was very popular of the time, the postulation of the concept
of “cultural relativism” and his empirical methods for collecting data and
analysis. His significant works include The Mind of Primitive Man (1911),
and Race, Language, and Culture (1940). James George Frazer greatly
contributed to the understanding of magic and religion. His most significant
work was The Golden Bough: A Study in Comparative Religion
(1891).W.H.R. Rivers also contributed to the development of the emerging
social anthropology. His contribution is mainly concerned with kinship and
social organization studies. His most significant works were TheTodas (1906)
and History of Melanesian Society (1914)

1.8 LET US SUM UP

The historical development in which they were evolved also had convergence
and divergence in its thrust areas of enquiry, particularly in the scope, interest
areas, theories, methodology, and practice. This is due to the fact that both
sociology and social anthropology study human society and largely share their
theoretical problems and interests. This is also the reason why social anthropology
is considered by many scholars to be part of sociology or a branch of sociology.
Anthropology and sociology were founded with the significant elements from
the natural sciences in one way or the other although the subject matter of
anthropology (integrated anthropology), particularly due to the components of
physical anthropology and archaeological anthropology exceeds sociology in
terms of its linkage with the physical sciences. In terms of emergence, social
anthropology is said to have emerged somewhat earlier than sociology. While
the immediate factor for the emergence of sociology is attributed to the various
factors, particularly the industrial, socio-political and intellectual movements in
Europe, the emergence of social anthropology can be mainly attributed to the
intellectual quest for understanding ‘the other’ exotic societies outside Europe
and other developed societies. However, the difference between sociology and
social anthropology even from the early years of is more on the application level
and setting priority of studies rather than at the level of the scope, concept, and
method.

1.9 CHECK YOUR PROGRESS

1) Discuss the emergence of sociology.
2) How did French Revolution of 1789 contribute to the Emergence of
Sociology?
3) Examine the trends of the emergence of social anthropology.
4) Discuss the phases of the emergence of social anthropology.
5) Examine the differences of the emergence of sociology with social
anthropology.

1.10 REFERENCES
Berger, P. (1963). Invitation to Sociology A Humanistic Perspective.New
York :Anchor Books Double Day & Company, Inc.
17
Nature and Scope of Sociology Bidney, D. (1953). Theoretical Anthropology. Columbia: Columbia University
Press.

Boas, Franz. (1911). The Mind of Primitive Man. New York: The Macmillan
Co.

Boas, Franz.(1940). Race, Language, and Culture. New York: The Macmillan

Co.

Boas, Franz [edited byHelen Codere]. (1966). Kwakiutl Ethnography. Chicago:

University of Chicago Press.

Bottomore, T.B. (1962). Sociology: A Guide to Problems and Literature. London:

George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

Eriksen, Thomas Hylland. (1995). Small Places, Large Issues: An Introduction

to Social and Cultural Anthropology. 2nd edition 2001. London: Pluto Press.

Eriksen, Thomas Hylland and Finn Sivert Nielsen. (2001). A History of

Anthropology (Second Edition). New York: Pluto Press.

Evans-Pritchard, E.E. (1951). Social Anthropology. London: Cohen & West Ltd.

Evans-Pritchard, E. E. (1966). Social Anthropology and Other Essays. New

York:Free Press.

Frazer, Sir James. (1891).The Golden Bough: A Study in Comparative Religion.

New York:Macmillan and Co.

Harris, Marvin.[1979] (1969).The Rise of Anthropological Theory. London &

Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Hoebel, E.A. (1958). Man in the Primitive World. New York/ London/ Toronto:
McGraw-Hill Book Company, INC.

Inkeles, A. (1975).What is Sociology? New Delhi: Prentice-Hall.

Koepping, Klaus-Peter. (1983). Adolf Bastian and the Psychic Unity of Mankind:
The Foundations of Anthropology in Nineteenth-Century Germany. New York:
University of Queensland Press.

Kuper, Adam J. (2018). “History of Anthropology.” In EncyclopaediaBritannica

(“Anthropology”).https://www.britannica.com/science/anthropology(Accessed
20 July 2018).

Lévi-Strauss, Claude. (1949). The Elementary Structures of Kinship. [Trans.

1969]. Boston: Beacon Press.

Lévi-Strauss, Claude. (1955). Tristes Tropiques. [Trans. John Weightman and

Doreen Weightman, 1973].New York: Atheneum.

Lévi-Strauss, Claude. (1963). Structural Anthropology. USA: Basic Books.

Mair, Lucy. (1965). An Introduction to Social Anthropology. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.
18
Malinowski, Bronislaw. (1922). Argonauts of the Western Pacific: An account Emergence of Sociology and
Social Anthropology
of native enterprise and adventure in the Archipelagoes of Melanesian New
Guinea. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Malinowski, Bronislaw. (1926). Crime and Custom in Savage Society. New York:
Harcourt, Brace & Co.

Malinowski, Bronislaw. (1944). A Scientific Theory of Culture and Other Essays.

Chapel Hill, N. Carolina: The University of North Carolina Press.

Mauss, Marcel. [1925] (1990). The Gift: forms and functions of exchange in

archaic societies. London: Routledge.

McGee, R. J. and Warms, R. L. (2012). Anthropological Theory: An Introductory

History (5th edition). USA:McGraw-Hill.

McLennan, John Ferguson. [1865] (1970). Primitive Marriage. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago Press. 

McLennan, John Ferguson. (1876). Studies in Ancient History. London: Bernhard

Quaritch.

McLennan, John Ferguson. [1885] (2006). The Patriarchal Theory. Adamant

Media Corporation. 

Morgan, Lewis H.(1871). Systems ofConsanguinity and Affinity of the Human

Family. New York: Smithsonian Institution.

Morgan, Lewis H.(1877). Ancient Society. New York: Henry Holt & Co.

Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. (1922). The Andaman Islanders: Astudy in Social

Anthropology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. (1952). Structure and Function in Primitive Society:

Essays and Addresses. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press.

Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. (1958). Method in Social Anthropology. Chicago, Illinois:

University of Chicago Press.

Ritzer, G. (2016).Classical Sociological Theory. New Delhi: McGraw Hill

Education (India).

Rivers,W.H.R. (1906). The Todas. New York and London: Macmillan.

Rivers,W.H.R. (1914). History of Melanesian Society.Cambridge:

CambridgeUniversity Press.

Sarana, Gopala. (1983). Sociology and Anthropology and Other Essays. Calcutta:
Institute of Social Research & Applied Anthropology.

Sjoberg, G. &Nett, R. (1968). ‘Basic Orientations towards the Scientific Method.’

In A Methodology for Social Research. New York: Harper & Row.

19
Nature and Scope of Sociology Tylor, Edward Burnett. (1865). Researches into the Early History of Mankind
and the Development of Civilization. London: John Murray.

Tylor, Edward Burnett. (1871). Primitive Culture.London: John Murray.

Tylor, Edward Burnett. (1881). Anthropology an introduction to the study of

man and civilization.London: Macmillan and Co.

Voget, Fred W. (1975). A History of Ethnology. USA: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

20