Reason & Rebellion: Iravati Karve

When we reflect on a person's legacy, although we try to focus on their achievements—their impact, contributions, and the struggles they endured—we inevitably recognize the more human and nonlinear aspects of a person’s life. Each of us is a complex mosaic of contradictions, shaped by the values of our time and reevaluated through the shifting lens of history. Iravati Karve, regarded as India’s first female sociologist and anthropologist, embodies such intricacies. Her life and work stand at the crossroads of pioneering scholarship, progressive thought, and the lingering constraints of outdated ideologies from her time.

Born in 1905 in Burma (present-day Myanmar), Iravati Karve was raised in a highly intellectual environment that shaped her worldview from an early age. Sent to India to be educated by the progressive Paranjpye family, she absorbed their emphasis on academic rigor, individualism, and social reform. Marrying into the Karve family—known for their contributions to education and social change—further solidified her commitment to intellectual inquiry and societal transformation. This foundation extended beyond academia, influencing her actions in daily life. For instance, she defied societal norms by riding a two-wheeler in Pune at a time when women were expected to adhere to rigid behavioral codes.

After earning an MPhil in anthropology from the University of Berlin in 1930, Karve joined the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Anthropology, Human Heredity, and Eugenics (KWI-A), an institution later infamous for its role in Nazi racial science. The environment was a challenging backdrop for a scholar from colonial India. Under the supervision of Eugen Fischer, a staunch proponent of racial hygiene, Karve was tasked with researching skull asymmetry and its supposed correlation to race. Fischer's hypothesis claimed that white Europeans had asymmetrical skulls to accommodate larger right frontal lobes, which he believed indicated higher intelligence and racial superiority.

Irawati Karvé and a diagram of a skull from her dissertation from Manufacturing Race

Karve's research, however, found no correlation between race and skull asymmetry. Her findings directly contradicted Fischer’s hypothesis and challenged the prevailing theories at the institute, as well as the broader Eurocentric, pseudoscientific assumptions of the time. This bold assertion in her dissertation not only contradicted her mentor but also rejected the broader racial hierarchies that underpinned much of the research at KWI-A. Her biography, 'Iru', also highlights the biases present in academic circles of the time. Despite Karve’s training and expertise, her conclusions were often questioned by white scholars, particularly when they conflicted with their own views. She was accused of bias solely because of her Indian background, with critics claiming that only outsiders could maintain the objectivity needed to study the subject impartially.

Despite the risk of backlash, Karve boldly presented her findings, defying deeply entrenched racist ideologies. Though Fischer awarded her the lowest grade, her work critically undermined the racial justifications for discrimination. Later, Fischer’s theories on racial superiority would be adopted by the Nazis to further their agenda. This historical context adds weight to Karve's academic rebellion, underlining her courage in the face of a deeply biased system.

After returning to India in 1931, Karve quickly established herself as a leading figure in sociology and anthropology. She conducted fieldwork that took her to remote villages across the country—often traveling with male colleagues, students, or even her children—to study the lives of various tribes. In an era when women were expected to remain close to home, Karve defied these societal constraints, embarking on challenging expeditions to study tribes and collect archaeological data. 

However, Karve’s legacy is not without contradictions. While she was a vocal advocate for women’s rights and education, her scholarship often fell short of directly addressing caste and religious discrimination. Although she actively challenged racial determinism in some contexts, she also engaged with colonial anthropological frameworks, resulting in a complex and sometimes contradictory approach to race and caste theories.

This engagement has drawn retrospective criticism, particularly for her assertions on the 'racial elements' of Indian castes and tribes. Additionally, her comments on race and caste, along with her anti-Muslim statements in 1947, further complicate her legacy. By the 1960s, Karve’s views evolved toward a more explicitly antiracist and multiculturalist stance, yet she continued to employ anthropometric methods in her research as late as 1968.  Her contradictions and evolving perspective  highlight the tension between scientific progress and inherited paradigms, illustrating how influential scholars, like all individuals, are shaped by the socio-political forces and ideological struggles of their time.

Throughout her career, Karve engaged with global scholarly circles, earning recognition beyond India. Institutions such as the School of Oriental and African Studies in London and the Rockefeller Foundation in the United States invited her to present her work. Yet, despite her international stature, she remained deeply connected to Indian academia, mentoring students and shaping the discipline of anthropology in the country.

Karve’s contributions to Indian sociology were groundbreaking. Her book 'Hindu Society: An Interpretation' remains a seminal work, offering an internal critique of the caste system and a comparative analysis of Indian and Western social structures. Her later work, 'Yuganta: The End of an Epoch', presented a feminist and critical reading of the Mahabharata, challenging dominant patriarchal narratives and shedding light on the human complexities of its characters. However, despite her advocacy for women’s rights in the public sphere, her views on gender remained somewhat conventional. Her daughter, Gauri Deshpande—a renowned bilingual writer—recalled that Karve did not support her decision to leave her husband, reflecting the inconsistencies in her ideals of progressiveness.

When discussing the legacy of women, there is often an expectation of a flawless role model—one without contradictions or imperfections. However, Iravati Karve’s legacy stands as a testament to both pioneering achievements and the contradictions inherent in her time. As India’s first female sociologist and anthropologist, she broke barriers in her field, challenging Eurocentric ideologies and reshaping narratives within Indian sociology. Her work—from critiquing the caste system to offering feminist reinterpretations of ancient texts—remains foundational. Yet, her views evolved within the constraints of her era, reflecting the complex relationship between progress and the limitations of her intellectual environment. Karve’s life underscores the importance of recognizing both the brilliance and imperfections that define a legacy, offering a nuanced perspective on the past and its continuing influence on the present.

Written by Janaky Sunil, edited by Parvathy Ramachandran and Janaky Sunil @ThinkHer

References:

1. https://migrantknowledge.org/2021/11/09/contradictions-of-irawati-karve/
2. Iru: The Remarkable Life of Irawati Karve, Speaking Tiger (2024)
3. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c93qqq5g416o
4. https://manufacturingrace.org/
5. https://thebetterindia.com/218443/irawati-karve-first-woman-anthropologist-india-inspiring-womens-day-gop94/