Asian and African Area Studies, 12 (2): 147-156, 2013

The State of Anthropology in Bhutan
Dorji Penjore*

Abstract
The title belies the contents of this paper, which is a narrative of the transformationof the Bhutanese scholarship from Buddhist to secular matters, from religious tomodern authors, and from classical Tibetan to English medium. The paper looks at
the traditional Bhutanese scholarship—monastic education—which was dominated bylamas and monks, pursued only Buddhist themes, and wrote in the classical Tibetan;
the western-style education system with English as the medium was introduced in thelate 1950s parallel to the traditional education system; and the modern education
system which is still biased towards studying science subjects, and hence the absence ofanthropological study of and in Bhutan. The paper ends with discussions on potential
areas of future anthropological research areas and challenges of doing fieldwork in
Bhutan.

1. Introduction
If there is such a thing called ‘Bhutanese Anthropology’—whether it is the anthropological study of
Bhutanese society and culture, or an anthropology course in Bhutan’s education system—we do notcurrently have one in Bhutan.
Until recent years the anthropological study of Bhutanese culture and society have been confinedto the study of some of the minority ethnic groups such as Brokpas, Lhops, and Monpas by both
Bhutanese and foreigner scholars, most of which were written to fulfil academic requirements in theuniversities. In 2009 Sherubtse College—the country’s premier institute, which offers undergraduate
courses in humanities, social and natural sciences—under Royal University of Bhutan (RUB), started
an undergraduate course in sociology in which anthropology is taught as a module. Royal Thimphu
College (RTC) replicated the same course in 2010. If the Bhutanese education planners had exercised
their foresights, anthropology, not sociology, should have been a more useful course to study Bhutan,a nation of villages and farmers.
In 1989, United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) commissioned Professor Fredrick Barthand Professor Unni Wikan, both Norwegian anthropologists, to study the situation of children
in Bhutan, and the report, Bhutan Report: Results of Fact Finding Mission was submitted in* Chief researcher, Center for Bhutan Studies, Thimphu, Bhutan
Accepted October 23, 2012147

Asian and African Area Studies, 12 (2)1990. In its effort to promote Bhutan studies and disseminate documents on Bhutan, Center for
Bhutan Studies (CBS) published their report under a new title, Situation of Children in Bhutan: An
Anthropological Perspective in 2011 as a monograph. It is the first work on Bhutan by trained andrenowned anthropologists, and among others, they wrote on Bhutan’s culture variations, a schematic
overviews of the environment and the world of Bhutanese children, social organizations, cosmology,
the persons, illness, and the life cycles from conception, birth, infants and children, courtship andmarriage, old age to death [Barth and Wikan 2011]. The reprinting of this report reveals a dearth ofanthropological works and literature on Bhutan.
If anthropology is the study of human culture and the hallmark of Bhutan’s nationhood
is founded on the national goal of preserving and promoting its unique cultural identity, howparadoxical it is that the anthropology is neither taught in the Bhutanese colleges nor is there aformal anthropological study of Bhutan. However, this partly mirrors the plight of anthropology
as an academic discipline everywhere—that anthropology is peripheral to other social sciences andhumanities subjects. When some Himalayan regions like Dolpo, Mustang, Solo-Khumbu in Nepal,
and Ladakh, Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh in India have received much attention from the western
academics, and began to be studied as a proxy for Tibet after the integration of Tibet to China in
1959, neither the Bhutanese themselves nor the western anthropologists have worked on Bhutan andin Bhutan. The country remains the least anthropologically studied belt in the entire Himalayan
areas which are influenced by the Tibetan Buddhism and cultures.

2. Traditional Bhutanese Scholarship
It may be helpful to first understand the traditional Bhutanese education system to contextualize
the beginning of modern scholarship in Bhutan. During the ecclesiocratic period (1651-1907), thetemples of learning were state and private monastic institutions, which unluckily were accessible to
only a few privileged male children. The scholarship was an exclusive domain of Buddhist lamas
and monks, and Buddhism the only proper subject of academic and spiritual pursuit. The monks
exclusively studied religious subjects, and any scholarship on secular or worldly matters, particularly
those associated with the ordinary people that did not contribute to the knowledge of Buddhism or
the goal of enlightenment, were systematically neglected. The voices of the common people which
did not conform to Buddhist values were actively discouraged. In the narratives of the state, theterm ‘folk’ or secular (jig tenpa or mi nagpo) is always differentiated from the religious (damcho). In
other words, there was a clear sacred-profane distinction. According to Aris [1987], the monastic
culture enjoyed an exclusive monopoly over the arts, education and government, and shaped popular148

PENJORE: The State of Anthropology in Bhutan

attitudes and values of the lay community, and the voices of the common people heard in some of the
popular folktales, folksongs, sayings, beliefs, and superstitions are remnants of those which escaped
the state censure. There was a tension between state power informed by Buddhist values on the one
hand, and common people’s values based on the individual, the family and the wider lay community
on the other. In such a situation, the common people relied on a rich Bhutanese oral tradition toeducate their children.
Traditional Bhutanese scholars made a huge contribution to the scholarship in the form ofnamthar, a hagiographical genre, which literally means ‘liberating through hearing.’ The main endof this corpus of writing is spiritual, not secular. However, many non-spiritual matters can be culledfrom these writings to construct the past and understand socio-political and religious milieu during
which they were written. Traditional Bhutanese scholarship was known for historical works in the
Himalayas, for they covered not only Bhutan but other Himalayan regions influenced by the Tibetan
culture. Most of the namthar are mostly of the Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal (1594-1651) and his
successive body, speech and mind reincarnations; Je Khenpo, the heads of the Drukpa Kagyu Schoolof Tibetan Buddhism; and Desis, the secular rulers [Pommaret 2002]. Authors themselves were religious figures and they wrote in the classical Tibetan. It was improper, unthinkable, or blasphemous
to write about lay people or non-Buddhist themes. This large body of literature today serve as theprimary source of information for writing about Bhutan’s history, culture, politics, society, etc.

3. British Writings
It was the non-Bhutanese writers who first wrote about the themes that were considered unimportantby Bhutanese traditional scholars. The letters and accounts of the Portuguese Jesuits Fathers Stephen
Cacella and John Cabral, the first Europeans to visit Bhutan, who briefly stayed in Bhutan in 1627
on their journey to Tibet, for example, provide rich information about Bhutan and its founder,
Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyal [see Baillie 1999]. But the main early sources for non-religious
matters are the accounts written by the British missions between 1774 and 1910. The British
Empire in India sent several political missions to Bhutan, initially to open trade routes to Tibet via
Bhutan—George Bogle and Alexander Hamilton, 1774-1777; Samuel Turner, 1783—and later forpolitical reasons—Kishen Kant Bose, 1815; R. Boileau Pemberton, 1838; Ashley Eden, 1863; J. C.
White, 1910. In absence of any records by Bhutanese themselves, these accounts are the only sourcesof writings on Bhutan, especially after the first contact with the British India in the south beginning
1770s (references to the British records can be found at [Dorji Penjore 2004]).

149

Asian and African Area Studies, 12 (2)4. Expatriate Writings
The next phase of writings was also by expatriates, mostly Indians, who had lived, worked, or visited
Bhutan after Bhutan was opened to the outside world beginning in the 1960s. The expatriates
worked in Bhutan in different roles to fill a crucial human resource shortage in implementing a seriesof five-year plan socio-economic development beginning from the first plan (1961-1966). Theirwritings in English on Bhutan’s society, politics, culture, folklore, festivals, environment, and otheraspects are being continued right to the present day. As an unexplored nation newly opened to theoutside world Bhutan became writers’ paradise.
In addition to the Indian expatriates, Bhutan attracted many travellers from around the world,
especially from Europe, who wrote on Bhutan in English and other European languages. Some ofthem were trained Tibetologists and authored authoritative works on Bhutan using primary information.

5. Modern Bhutanese Scholarship
According to Karma Ura [2010], the first school was established in Bumthang in Bhutan with 14
Bhutanese boys, following the visit of the first king Ugyen Wangchuck to Kolkatta, India, in 1911 toattend the Coronation Durbar of King George V (1865-1936). In 1914 the king sent 45 boys to the
Dr Graham’s Home School in Kalimpong. Another school was established in Haa in western Bhutan
to teach in English and Hindi that same year. In 1915, another school was established in Bumthangwith 14 students. The first batch of students became important officials in 1930s and 1940s [KarmaUra 2010]. The government developed a formal national education system in 1955, and in 1959 it
was decided to provide free universal modern education. In 1959 only 72 Bhutanese were English
literate.

Sherubtse College, established in 1968, later began to offer three-year undergraduate

courses and it later became a premier institute in Bhutan. It was only in the late 1980s that the
Bhutanese started to write on secular themes using western methodologies, narratives and in English.
The writing of history became quite popular. Most of the writers had religious background, notably
Lam Sanga (lineage, [1983]); Lopen Nado (history, [1986]); and Pema Tshewang (history, [1994]).
The religious figure like Geden Rinchen also began to write on history [1972]. It was a beginning of
religious figure writing on secular matter in the classical Tibetan as well as Dzongkha, the national
language, and the lay writers—the product of the western education—writing on quasi-religious
themes in English. In 1995 Karma Ura wrote the first book length novel on Bhutan’s social, politicaland economic lives and institutions, which existed during the reigns of the second (reign: 1926150

PENJORE: The State of Anthropology in Bhutan1952) and the third king (reign: 1952-1972). Titled The Hero with a Thousand Eyes: A Historical
Novella, Karma Ura drew on the life history of an officer who served both the first and second kingsin various positions and roles. Of Rainbows and Clouds: The Life of Yab Ugyen Dorji as Told to
His Daughter soon followed it in 1999. The life history account narrated by Ugyen Dorji to hisdaughter, the Queen of Bhutan Ashi Dorji Wangmo Wangchuck, forms the basis of the book.
However, it was in the Bhutanese oral tradition that writings by Bhutanese on Bhutan in English
flourished. Unlike in other countries, it was a woman not man who pioneered the compilation of
the Bhutanese folktales and made them accessible to students and English audience. Folktales of
Bhutan (1993) was followed four years later by Bhutanese Tales of the Yeti (1997). Kinley Wangmo
published Tales from Rural Bhutan in 1998. Other publications on Bhutanese folktales are Ap
Wang Dugay: A Bhutanese Folk Hero (1995) by John Michael Chiramal; Folktales of Bhutan (1998)
by Rita Thomas; Talisman of Good Fortune and other Stories from Rural Bhutan (2002) by Rinzin
Rinzin; Heard from Grandparents (2002) by Drugyal HSS Literary Club; Bhutanese Folktales fromthe South and the East (2004) by Gopilal Acharya; Was it a Yeti or a Deity? A collection of folktales
from Kheng (2006) by Dorji Penjore; The Cuckoo and the Pigeon: A Collection of Folktales from
Rural Bhutan (2008) by Ngawang Phuntsho; and Dangphu Dingphu: A Collection of Bhutanese
Folktales (2011) by Dorji Penjore.
Karma Ura published The Ballad of Pemi Tshewang Tashi: Wind Borne Feather in 1996: theEnglish rendering of a popular ballad known as loze (once taught in the college as a textbook) of achamberlain who was sent against his wish to fight and who died fighting for his lord in the 1880s.
Gaylong Sumdar Tashi: Songs of Sorrow (1998) by Sonam Kinga is a similar translation of thenarrative account of a Bhutanese monk caught between his love and family on the one hand and his
duty as a monk on the other. C.T. Dorji has written a dozen books on various aspects of Bhutan,
from Buddhism, history, and poetry to topics such as public transport.

6. Anthropology in BhutanEver since the introduction of a western-style English medium education system in Bhutan in the
1950s, the education policy was heavily biased towards training engineers and doctors at the expenseof social scientists and artists. The country was then facing a manpower shortage of all trainings
and levels. After physical science, the natural choice of students, parents and teachers was social
science, accounting, and economics in particular. English literature is the only humanities subject
taught in the college and it received the last preference. Irrespective of their academic inclination andambition, bright students were compelled to study science subjects because of a systemic structural151

Asian and African Area Studies, 12 (2)bias that rewarded science students. Students who opted for science subjects studied abroad, mostly
in India, while those opting social science and humanities subjects had to be content with studying in
Bhutan. Sadly, the country is yet to come out of this systemic bias. Today, both the government andbilateral and multilateral development partners provide scholarships to study science and engineering. It was during the last few years that civil servants working in research and academic institutes
like Center for Bhutan Studies and Royal University of Bhutan had chosen to study anthropology
and sociology for their graduate study. This is indeed the beginning of a Bhutanese anthropology.
Thus far only five full ethnographic works have been published: Jagar Dorji’s Lhop: A Tribal
Community in South Western Bhutan, and its Survival Through Time (2003); B. Deben Sharma’s
Lhops (Doya) of Bhutan: An Ethnographic Account (2005); Sita Giri’s The Vital Link: Monpas andTheir Forests (2004); Raghubir Chand’s Brokpas: The Hidden Highlanders of Bhutan (2004); andLove, Courtship and Marriage in Rural Bhutan: A Preliminary Ethnography of Wamling Village in
Zhemgang (2009) by Dorji Penjore. The later is a home ethnography, with a particular focus on a
traditional courtship custom, whose variants are widely practiced in eastern and central Bhutan.
Some of the unique Bhutanese culture and customs have received more attention from the
Bhutanese writers such as the marriage customs: Sonam Wangmo’s ‘The Brokpas: A Semi-nomadic
People in Eastern Bhutan’ (1990); Tenzin Dorji’s ‘Marriage Customs and Practices of the Me rag Sag
steng Nomads (‘brog pa) of bkra shis sgang, Eastern Bhutan’ (2002); Lham Dorji’s Sergamathang
Kothkin and other Bhutanese Marriage Customs (2004). The last one presents the Brokpas’s chungnyen, a complex childhood engagement ritual, involving a matchmaker and gift exchange. It also
covered serga mathang (golden cross-cousin) marriage in Mongar district in eastern Bhutan, andngenzhung marriage in the lower Kheng (central Bhutan). The latter is the only marriage practicein Bhutan in which a husband has to offer three years of labour as bride service before he can marry
and take his wife permanently to his house. Ugyen Pelgen and Tenzin Rigden wrote Khengrig
Namsum: A Historical Profile of Zhemgang Dzongkhag in 1999. The list ends here.

7. Future of Anthropological Research in BhutanThis lack of anthropological research in and of Bhutan is indeed a blessing in disguise, for it provides
an opportunity rarely found in other countries to do original research, and for the Bhutanese
anthropologists to study about their own country and address some of the issues facing anthropology
such as the problems of representation and relevance. Center for Bhutan Studies has been establishedin 1999 to slowly become a premier social science institute in the country. It started social scienceor anthropological study by studying non-Buddhist festivals which most villages across eastern and152

PENJORE: The State of Anthropology in Bhutan

central Bhutan celebrate every year. It also began the publication of the bi-annual Journal of Bhutan
Studies where papers related to Bhutanese studies are published. It also started two publications(monograph and occasional publication series) on social, religious, cultural, historical, political,
and economic aspects of Bhutan. National Library and Archives of Bhutan (NLAB) and National
Museum of Bhutan (NMB) have also been promoting the Bhutanese study and have made significant
contributions to the Bhutanese studies.
Today Bhutan is a nation going through a dramatic transition. There is a tremendous scope fordoing traditional ethnographic fieldwork and researching on religion, rituals, social organizations,family, kinship, etc., as well as the modern and post-modern themes: of the Bhutanese who arecaught in the dramatic social and political transformation; youth, the social and culture impacts ofTV and mass media; migration; tourism. Two national surveys on Gross National Happiness haveyielded minefields of information on the country’s ethnicity, languages and dialects, traditional
community institutions and structures, culture, traditions and belief systems [CBS 2009].
But there are challenges as well, a bureaucratic procedure to begin with. Presently there isno system in place that will allow foreign scholars to conduct an independent or joint research in
Bhutan. The government has been employing consultants, and relevant government ministries ordepartments have been handling these experts. The nature of study is technical and not social,
cultural or in-depth study of the contexts. Center for Bhutan Studies started to accept a few foreignscholars, both professors and students, under its internship programme to do fieldwork-based
research in Bhutan. But the programme could not be sustained due to the floodgate of applications
and incapacity of Center to handle the demand and provide effective research counterparts. Royal
University of Bhutan and a few other institutes like National Museum of Bhutan and National
Library and Archives of Bhutan have also begun similar programmes, but these institutes too weresimilarly handicapped. There is no clear government policy on accepting foreign scholars to do along-term fieldwork—something that is necessary or mandatory for anthropology—in Bhutan.
The second challenge is the government’s conservative tourism policy because of its concern
for environment and culture. A minimum tourist tariff is of USD 200 every day (the amount covers
one’s local lodge, food and transport) is presumably one of the highest in the world. Because ofthis strict tourism policy, there is a notion to ‘eroticize’ Bhutan and to assume that the tariff isprohibitively expensive. It is also possible to conduct research in Bhutan without paying daily tariff
if mutually beneficial research projects are agreed with counterparts in Bhutan. One main challenge
is the language. One needs to identify and decide where research or fieldwork is going to take place.
Linguistically Bhutan is not as homogeneous as it seems with about 18 local languages and dialects,
153

Asian and African Area Studies, 12 (2)including the national language, Dzongkha and Nepali language, spoken across the country, when
Malinowskian anthropologists are required to learn the native language. For that matter, mastery of
local language is not an option for in-depth study. Worst, most of these dialects are not intelligible toeach other. Although Dzongkha is widely spoken and understood, common people’s knowledge of
Dzongkha is too poor to yield necessary research information, some of which may be technical. In
some areas, the language spoken in one village is different from the next village, only half an houron foot. Because most people in Thimphu and Paro, the first contact points for foreigners, speak
English, visitors find it difficult to learn local languages. Even without a tourist tariff, fieldwork
in Bhutan has been found to be difficult and expensive. The population is scattered over far-flung
villages separated by high mountains and rivers.

8. Conclusion
The history of modern Bhutanese scholarship is only about thirty years old. The Bhutanese whowent to modern English medium schools first began to write only in the 1980s. During the last few
years, there has been a flowering of Bhutanese writing in English and Dzongkha, while traditional
scholarship is almost dead. Increasing number of Bhutanese is embracing writing as a vocation.
Center for Bhutan Studies has issued ISBN for 1,128 books since 2007. Center for Bhutan Studies
also published, both in print and on line, about 70 books since 1999. Earlier, the Bhutanese writers
wrote for schools, now they have started to write for the reading public. Bhutan’s literacy rate has
been improving, and with it there is a corresponding increase of the Bhutanese reading public.
As a direct consequence of globalization, Bhutanese are beginning to realise that their uniqueculture will no more be safe, and the best safety is to write and document for posterity. Anthropologists are better placed than the rest to do research on all aspects of Bhutanese culture. Most of thebooks written by the non-Bhutanese on Bhutan are not good to say the least, and increasing numbersof Bhutanese are placing increasing demand on the Bhutanese writers to rewrite and represent themcorrectly. For foreign researchers, the challenges of doing research in Bhutan are many, but so are
the rewards.
References
Aris, Michael. 1987. The Boneless Tongue: Alternative Voices from Bhutan in the Context of Lamaist Societies,
Past and Present 115: 131-164.
Baillie, Luiza Maria. 1999. Father Estevao Cacella’s Report on Bhutan in 1627, Journal of Bhutan Studies
1(1): 1-35.
Barth, Fredrick and Unni Wikan. 2011. Situation of Children in Bhutan: An Anthropological Perspective.
154

PENJORE: The State of Anthropology in Bhutan

Thimphu: Center for Bhutan Studies.
Center for Bhutan Studies (CBS). 2004. Waya Wayo: The Voices of the Past. Thimphu: Center for Bhutan
Studies.
＿．2009. Gross National Happiness Survey Findings 2007-2008. Thimphu: Center for Bhutan Studies.
Chime Wongmo. 1985. Rituals of Bhutanese House Construction. In Barbara Nimri Aziz and Matthew Kapsteineds., Soundings in Tibetan Civilization (Proceedings of the 1982 Seminars of the International Association
for Tibetan Studies held at Columbia University). New Delhi: Manohar, pp. 107-114.
Dorji Penjore. 2004a. Bhutan’s National Bibliography. Thimphu: Center for Bhutan Studies.
＿．2004b. On the Mule Track to Dagana. Thimphu: Center for Bhutan Studies.
＿．2009. Love, Courtship and Marriage in Rural Bhutan: A Preliminary Ethnography of Wamling
Village in Zhemgang. Thimphu: Galing Printers and Publishers.
Pommaret, Francoise. 2002. Recent Bhutanese Scholarship in History and Anthropology, Journal of Bhutan
Studies 2(2): 139-163.
Jagar Dorji. 2003. Lhop: A Tribal Community in South Western Bhutan, and its Survival Through Time.
Paro: Jagar Dorji.
Karma Ura. 1995. The Hero with a Thousand Eyes: A Historical Novella. Thimphu: Karma Ura.
＿．1996. The Ballad of Pemi Tshewang Tashi: Wind Borne Feather. Thimphu: Karma Ura.
＿．2010. Leadership of the Wise: The Kings of Bhutan. Thimphu: Dasho Karma Ura.
Lham Dorji. 2004. Sergamathang Kothkin and other Bhutanese Marriage Customs. Monograph No 3. Thimphu: Center for Bhutan Studies.
Raghubir Chand. 2004. Brokpas: The Hidden Highlanders of Bhutan. Uttarakhand, India: People’s Associationfor Himalaya Area Research (PAHAR).
Tshering Tashi. 2008. Druk Gyalpo Ugyen Wangchuck’s Twenty Points Proposal to the British India to Modernize Bhutan, Journal of Bhutan Studies 19 (Winter): 1-8.
Select list of anthropology-related works on Bhutan in English
Sharma, B. Deben. 2005. Lhops (Doya) of Bhutan: An Ethnographic Account. New Delhi: Akansha Publishing House.
Sita Giri. 2004. The Vital Link: Monpas and Their Forests. Thimphu: Center for Bhutan Studies.
Sonam Chhoki. 1990. Religion in Bhutan I: The Sacred and the Obscene in Bhutanese Religion. In N. K.
Rustomji and C. Ramble eds., Himalayan Environment and Culture. Shimla: Indian Institute ofAdvanced Study, pp. 107-121.
Sonam Kinga. 1998. Gaylong Sumdar Tashi : Songs of Sorrow. Thimphu: Sonam Kinga.
＿．2006. Nyen Nyeu Thungm – Relations Close and Shorter: A Perspective on the Bhutanese Kingship
Systems. Proceedings of the 5th Colloquium on Tangible and Intangible Culture of Bhutan. Paro: National
Museum of Bhutan, pp. 479-484.
Sonam Wangmo. 1990. The Brokpas: A Semi-nomadic People in Eastern Bhutan. In N. K. Rustomji and C.
Ramble eds., Himalayan Environment and Culture. Shimla: Indian Institute of Advanced Study, pp. 1411158.
Tenzin Dorji. 2008. Flute of Diza: Marriage Customs and Practices among the Brogpa of Merak and Sakteng(English translation by Sonam Kinga). Thimphu: Bhutan Times.
Ugyen Pelgen and Tenzin Rigden. 1999. Khengrig Namsum: A Historical Profile of Zhemgang Dzongkhag.
Zhemgang: Integrated Sustainable Development Program (ISDP).
155

Asian and African Area Studies, 12 (2)Wangchuck, Dorji Wangmo. 1999. Of Rainbows and Clouds: The Life of Yab Ugyen Dorji as Told to His
Daughter. London: Serindia Publication.
In Dzongkha and Classical Tibetan
Geden Rinchen. 1972. lho’i chos ‘byung gsar pa, 182 folio, Tango edition.
Lam Sanga. 1983. ‘brug gi smyos rabs gsal ba’i me long. Thimphu.
Lopen Nado. 1986. ‘brug dkar po. Tharpaling, Bumthang.
Pema Tshewang. 1994. ‘brug gi rgyal rabs. Thimphu: National Library.
Tenzin Dorji. 2002. ‘brug shar phyogs pa’i gnyen lam brtsi stangs dang / bkra shis sgang phyogs kyi ‘brog pa
gnyen sgrig gnyen sbyor bya tshul lo rgyus mdor bsdus na gzhon pho mo’i rna ba’i dpyid du gyur pa’i gtam
dri za’i gling bu zhes bya ba bzhugs so//, Bulletin of Tibetology 38 (2): 39-60.

156