Department of Anthropology College of Arts and Sciences The University of Alabama
ANTHROPOLOGICAL THEORIES:
A GUIDE PREPARED BY STUDENTS FOR
STUDENTS
HISTORICISM
JONATHAN BERRY
jberry@woodsquad.as.ua.edu
Identify and briefly characterize the defining positions of the approach in question.
Historicism, as a school of thought, focuses on the historical context of cultures. A culture does not exist outside of time, but rather rises up out of a historical drama or narrative that shapes and directs the culture. The radical historicist emphasizes the narrative of history (or an aspect of that narrative's culture) to such an extent that it becomes a self-defining, self-subsistent capsule which ultimately dismantles any larger historical context the culture may have.
Historicism is a "doctrine holding that explanation of the social sciences is necessarily historical, and that the interpretation of cultural phenomena requires the preservation of context; stronger versions also hold that a historical or cultural pattern possesses uniqueness and exists sui generis" (Winthrop 139).
Indicate, where possible, the theories, methodologies and scholars against which the approach in question may be considered a reaction. What problems are perceived to be better addressed by adopting this theoretical and/or methodological position?
Name and provide brief biographies of the principal scholars assoicated with the approach.
RUTH BENEDICT 1887-1948: One of the most well known anthropologists. She continued Boas work with the Kwakiutl and worked with the Zuni as well. She believed, along with Kroeber, that anthropology's proper place was in the humanities and not in the sciences. She was the foremost proponent of the culture and personality school.
FRANZ BOAS (1858-1942): Boas was born and grew up in Germany. He entered college when he was twenty. He studied physics, math and geography. His dissertation was titled "Contributions to the Understanding of the Color of Water." After a brief teaching position at the University of Berlin Boas went on to become an American and do fieldwork among the Kwakiutl (1886). He was the curator of ethnology for the American Museum of Natural History in New York (1896-1905). In 1899 he became the first professor of anthropology for Columbia University. He would serve in this position for the rest of his life. In 1910 Boas assisted in the founding of the International School of American Archeology and Ethnology in Mexico. He was the resident director in 1911-1912. He left behind him not only shelves of published material but a legacy in his students that has continued to shape and reshape twentieth century anthropology (Bohannon 81).
R. FRITZ GRAEBNER (1877-1934): Graebner is the founder of the diffusionist school in Germany. This recognition is linked largely to his highly influential book Methode der Ethnologie (Hays 282-283).
G. ELLIOT SMITH (1871-1937): Smith attempted to establish a theory of diffusion that used mummification as a primary culture trait of a rather odd culture complex that would establish Egypt as birthplace of all world culture (Hays 286-288).
Sir Edward Evans-Pritchard 1902-1973:
ALFRED LOUIS KROEBER 1876-1960: American anthropologist noted for his inquiry into the nature of culture. He was influential in the development of anthropology as an academic field.
ROBERT H. LOWIE (1883-1957): Austrian-born American anthropologist noted for his studies of Native Americans of the Plains.
PAUL RADIN (1883-1959): Radin is known for his extensive work on the Winnebago of North America. He was one of the first ethnographers to establish the important method of life history in his record of the biography of Crashing Thunder.
WILLIAM H. RIVERS (1864-1922): R ivers is noted for his studies of Melanesion society.
EDWARD SAPIR (1884-1939): Sapir's primary work was in linguistics and was "a pioneer in uniting psychology and anthropology. His contribution to diffusion consisted in analyzing the types of evidence which could be used to determine the spread of cultural elements from their point of origin" (Hays 289).
CLARK WISSLER (1870-1947): Wissler is an American anthropologist he used primary food sources to map culture areas in the Americas.
Identify and briefly characterize the seminal works of the approach (i.e., articles, books, monographs, serials, etc.)
Identify and define the principal concepts which constitute the intellectual building blocks of the approach. Discuss any ambiguities or competing definitions.
CULTURE
Alfred L. Kroeber:
"Kroeber.assigned overwhelming priority to culture which he termed the superorganic, asserting that the individual is completely subordinate to culture, an therefore irrelevant from the point of view of anthropology" (Barrett 56).
CULTURE AREA: "A region of relative environmental and cultural uniformity, characterized by societies with significant similarities in mode of adaptation and social structure. Cultural area is a heuristic concept, providing a geographic ordering of societies on the basis of shared environmental and cultural features" (Winthrop 61).
CULTURE COMPLEXES
CULTURE TRAIT
DIFFUSION: "The transfer of discrete culture traits from one society to another, through migration, trade, war, or other contact" (Winthrop 82). "Diffusionist theory, in contrast [to evolutionary theory], presumes that humans are inherently and uninventive and that the major route of progress in culture has been through the spread of civilization from a very few culture centers" (Winthrop 83).
DIFFUSIONISM: There were three schools of diffusionism. The Kulturkreise school of Vienna held that whole cultural complexes diffused. The British school which tended to see only a few geographical areas of original culture from which all cultures have arisen. The Boasian school, which withstood many of the pitfalls of its associates, held that cultures did share traits but this school developed an aversion to excessive unfounded diffusionist claims (Barrett 53-54).
EVOLUTIONARY THEORY: Evolutionary theory presumes that innovation is a common feature of social life and that the shared mental characteristics of our species make it inevitable that significant inventions (e.g., percussion flaking, pottery, unilineal descent, writing) will be developed independently in numerous societies" (Winthrop 83).
FIELDWORK: For the historicist (historical particularist) emphasis is upon fieldwork, and generalizing is reserved until all relevant data has been gathered (Barrett 54).
INDEPENDENT INVENTION
PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION: For the historicist the emic analysis is primary.
"SALVAGE" ETHNOGRAPHY
Describe the standards for research design adopted by the school under consideration. Discuss the methods, techniques,and models advanced.
Franz Boas:
"If we want to make progress on the desired line, we must insist upon critical methods, based not on generalities but on each individual case. In many cases the final decision will be on dependent origin in others in favor of dissemination" (Boas, as quoted by Harris 260). "Boas was aggressively atheoretical, rejecting as unsubstantiated assumptions the grand reconstructions of both evolutionists, such as Lewis Henry Morgan and Herbert Spencer, and diffusionists, such as G. E. Smith and Fritz Graebner" (Winthrop 83-84). Marvin Harris records Boas' "mission" as seeking "to rid anthropology of its amateurs and armchair specialists by making ethnographic research in the field the central experience and minimum attribute of professional status" (Harris 250)
Paul Radin:
An ethnography, he held, should only have "as much of the past and as much of the contacts with other cultures as is necessary for the elucidation of the particular period. No more" (Radin, as quoted by Hays 292).
Clark Wissler:
"The future status of anthropology depends upon the establishment of a chronology for man and his culture based upon objective verifiable data" (Wissler, as quoted by Hays 290).
Accomplishments
Criticisms
The historicist can be criticized for busy him/herself with writing a cultural history by selecting the cultural particulars that best fit their historical model; an anthropologist, like anyone else, only sees what they expect to see. This criticism is perhaps the most worthy of concern; however, even this criticism can be taken and has been taken to the extent of denying totally the existence any valid historical reconstruction.
Discuss how anthropological knowledge has been advanced by the work of this school.
Discuss the theoretical, methodolgoical and empirical problems and limitations of the approach identified by its critics. How have these criticisms been met?
The historical approach, while giving a ground to the study of culture_because of its reaction to the diffusionist/evolutionist paradigm_can become overly focused on the particulars of a given culture and its uniqueness to such an extent that it is blind to the relatively open stance of culture in the wake of the onslaught of contagious differences from the surrounding cultures. A culture is not immuned to change that occurs from something other than historical progression. The historicist can be criticised for busy him/herself with writing a cultural history by selecting the cultural particulars that best fit their historical model; an anthropologist, like anyone else, only sees what they expect to see. This criticism is perhaps the most worthy of concern; however, even this criticism can be taken and has been taken to the extent of denying totally the existence any valid historical reconstruction.
This is the place for any commentary that does not sit well in any of the previous categories.
List (with hyperlinks) and describe any web sites you have found that are relevant to this school of thought.
Return to ANTHROPOLOGICAL THEORIES:
A GUIDE PREPARED BY STUDENTS FOR
STUDENTS
Return to Anthropology 536
Return to M.D. Murphy's Page
Return to Anthropology Department Web Page