48 SOCIAL SCIENTIST question of studying how an aggressive colonialism affected the mode of surplus-appropriation and capital formation in this part of India. The third and concluding part will deal in a more general way with the 'regenerative5 and 'destructive.5 role of colonialism, with special reference to its role in South India. It will also attempt to present a few hypotheses about the role and character of colonialism and its relationship with the political economy of backwardness. Problems of Method : Importance of a Theoretical Approach The writer of this paper firmly believes that of all approaches to the study of the development of societies, Marxism alone has the theoretical-conceptual outlook and the method to grapple with the problem of historical transition. It is the essence of this method to show how, as man in the course of his development moves away from his early relation with nature, the labour-property relation weakens and takes the form of a "separation of free labour from the objective conditions of its realisation— from the means and material of labour.551 It goes without saying that this method alone can identify any meaningful theory of colonisation. Contrary to the contention of some historians, nowhere is the theoretical-conceptual value of this method more clearly seen than in the study of Asiatic societies. Anyone attempting to study the impact of early colonisation on a particular society must first of all analyse the forces and relations of production, the internal development, of that society in pre-colonial days. It is particularly with reference to India that the originality and brilliance of Marx's theory comes to the fore. Let us note the salient characteristics of this theory and how they apply to the study of conditions in South India. Studying historical development, Marx distinguished a number of socio-economic formations and a certain succession. His observations on the Asiatic mode were based on information that was by no means as reliable as the wide reading on which he based his analysis of the rise of feudalism in the West. But as Hobsbawm points out, this does not mean that Marx's and Engels^ knowledge was "insufficient for the elaboration their theories of pre-capitalist societies.552 The mere accumulating of volumes and articles does not advance basic historical understanding. In fact, Marx's thinking as represented by Pre-capitalist Economic Formations was based on varied historical studies.3 What is the core of Marx"^ concentrated and highly original thinking on the Asiatic mode ? Speaking at a general level, three or four 'alternative routes5 out of the primitive communal system are possible : the oriental, the ancient, the Germanic and a Slavic form. Each is characterised by a form of the social division of labour within it. Hobsbawm correctly points out that it is inadequate to discuss this mental system in the light of Marx^ and Engel's earlier letters -and on