Steps in the Right Direction

Professor Eric Mueggler Graduate Student Instructor Shana Melnysyn

October 12

, 2007Tyrone Schiff

Tyrone Schiff Anthropology 330Steps in the Right DirectionToday, society accepts the fact that humanity is diverse. This has not always beenthe case, however. In fact, human diversity is a relatively new idea on the immense andinfinite timeline of existence. About 150 years ago, anthropologists and ethnographers partook in a revolution of understanding ethnological time. Scholars and researchersformulated theories and concepts that broke down mental barriers that previously dictatedthe common outlook on human diversity. Some of the most significant contributionscame from Thomas R. Trautmann. His work provides a framework for interpreting ahistorical view of ethnological thought. This is important to include because in order tounderstand the transformation in human diversity, we must understand its past. In order tofurther realize how the concept of human diversity has transformed through time, TheOrigins of Culture by Edward Burnett (E.B.) Tylor will be cited. E.B. Tylor, an Englishanthropologist, provides the first examples of cultural evolutionism. Ultimately,Europeans defined human diversity in terms of having similar capacities that evolved intohigher and more complex social forms.To begin let us draw on Trautmann’s historical perspective of human diversity prior to the revolution in ethnological thought. Essentially, ethnological andanthropological accounts were based on biblical narratives (Trautmann 1992: 386).Trautmann explains that, “each nation in the Bible narrative takes its origin by descentfrom Noah and his three sons, Shem, Ham and Japhet, often identified respectively withthe nations of Asia, Africa and Europe” (Trautmann 1992: 386). This view of human beginnings is very simplified. It is also a fundamentally old worldview of ethnology; one

based primarily in biblical text. It pinpoints a start and extrapolates from that the anatomyof the world. The reason that this view does not promote human diversity is because itclassifies enormous regions together and does not take into account the variances that areinherent to each. A significant benefit of the revolution was its ability to claim separatecreations of humans or perhaps even the degeneration from an “original” human type.Becoming aware of the similarities and differences amongst cultures is central toanthropology and stemmed from the revolution in ethnological time. A positiveconsequence of the revolution in ethnological time was its ability to welcome diversityand dissimilarities inherent to human existence. This new view of human life promotedexploration and education about unique cultures dispersed around the world and spurredanthropological research. However, there were further strides to make before therevolution could occur.The definitive step towards the revolution in ethnological time was the discoveryof archaeological evidence. Human history, up until this point, could essentially be“crowded into the space of a few thousand years” (Trautmann 1992: 380). When bonesand extinct animals started to be found by anthropologists, the idea of a short chronologyof life was changed forever (Trautmann 1992: 380). All of a sudden, anthropologists hadgreat lengths of time to fill. Therefore, they had to develop a new schema or theory to fillin the immense time gaps that were becoming more evident based on archaeologicalfindings. The prevailing theory that surfaced out of the revolution in ethnological time issocial evolutionism (Trautmann 1992: 380). This concept is largely the result of CharlesDarwin’s findings and publications. It is not to say that the revolution in ethnologicaltime was the result of Darwinism, but rather that his theory helped put the pieces of the