60 SOCIAL SCIENTIST Leiten further goes on to add that. The Marxist contribution of the development of sociology was predominantly by economists such as Utsa Patnaik, Pradhan Prasad, Ashok Rudra, and others' (p.65). This is an intriguing evaluation. The 'mode of production' debate to which Leiten is obviously referring did have a major impact on Marxist scholarship in India and transcended so-called disciplinary boundaries. The contribution of scholars enumerated above were important as Marxists addressing themselves to a seminal enquiry. The 'mode of production' debate was not merely sociological, it was a political question and hence to enclose it within the bounds of particular disciplines would be spurious. If anything, the lessons of that debate seems to have served as an impetus to multi-disciplinary but theoretically grounded research in the social sciences in India. Its legacy can hardly be contained within the artificial boundaries of academic disciplines. ANJAN GHOSH Centre for Studies in Social Sciences NOTES AND REFERENCES 1. Kristoffel Leiten, 'Indian Sociology', Social Scientist, 164, January 1987, pp. 64-66. All page references within parentheses refers to this review. 2. Y. Singh, Indian Sociology: Social Conditioning and Emerging Concerns, Vistaar Publications, New Delhi, 1986, pp. ix. 3. Ramakrishna Mukherjee, Sociology of Indian Sociology, Allied Publishers, New Delhi, 1979.