Anthropology is the study of humanity. It has origins in thenatural sciences, the humanities, and the social sciences.

[1]The term "anthropology", pronounced /ænθrɵˈpɒlədʒi/, is from the Greek anthrōpos (ἄνθρωπος), "man", and -logia (-λογία), "discourse" or "study", and was first used in 1501 by German philosopher Magnus Hundt.[2] Anthropology's basic concerns are "What defines Homo sapiens?", "Who are the ancestors of modern Homo sapiens?", "What are humans' physical traits?", "How do humans behave?", "Why are there variations and differences among different groups of humans?", "How has the evolutionary past ofHomo sapiens influenced its social organization and culture?" and so forth. In the United States, contemporary anthropology is typically divided into four sub-fields: cultural anthropology (also called "social anthropology"), archaeology, linguistic anthropology, and physical (or biological) anthropology.[3] The four-fieldapproach to anthropology is reflected in many undergraduate textbooks[4] as well as anthropology programs (e.g. Michigan, Berkeley, Penn, etc.). At universities in the United Kingdom, and much of Europe, these "sub-fields" are frequently housed in separate departments and are seen as distinct disciplines.[5] The social and cultural sub-field has been heavily influenced bystructuralist and post-modern theories, as well as a shift toward the analysis of modern societies (an arena more typically in the remit of sociologists). During the 1970s and 1980s there was anepistemological shift away from the positivist traditions that had largely informed the discipline.[6] During this shift, enduring questions about the nature and production of knowledge came to occupy a central place in cultural and social anthropology. In contrast, archaeology, biological anthropology, and linguistic anthropology remained largely positivist. Due to this difference in epistemology, anthropology as a discipline has lacked cohesion over the last several decades. This has even led to departments diverging, for example in the 1998–9 academic year at Stanford University, where the "scientists" and "non-scientists" divided into two departments: anthropological sciences and cultural & social anthropology;[7] these departments later reunified in the 2008–9 academic year.[8]
Contents
[hide]

• • • o • o

1 Overview 2 Basic trends 3 History 3.1 20th century 4 Countries 4.1 Britain

o 
1940s

4.2 United States 4.2.1 19th Century to


anthropology

4.2.2 Boasian

o o o • • o • o • • • o o

4.3 Canada 4.4 France 4.5 Other countries 5 Post-World War II 6 Controversies about its history 6.1 Military 7 Major discussions 7.1 Focus on other cultures 8 See also 9 References 10 Further reading 10.1 Dictionaries and encyclopedias 10.2 Fieldnotes and memoirs of

anthropologists

o o
works

10.3 Histories 10.4 Textbooks and key theoretical

11 External links

[edit]Overview Anthropology is traditionally divided into four sub-fields, each with its own further branches:biological or physical anthropology, social anthropology or cultural anthropology, archaeologyand anthropological linguistics.[3] These fields frequently overlap, but tend to use different methodologies and techniques. Biological anthropology, or physical anthropology, focuses on the study of human populations using an evolutionary framework. Biological anthropologists have theorized about how the globe has become populated with humans (e.g. the "Out Of Africa" and "multi-regional evolution" debate), as well as tried to explain geographical human variation and race. Many biological anthropologists studying modern human populations identify their field ashuman ecology, itself linked to sociobiology. Human ecology uses

museum pieces and modern garbage. etiquette. Linguistic anthropology (also called anthropological linguistics) seeks to understand the processes of human communications. and their demographics. Ethnography can refer to both a methodology and a product of research. variation in language across time and space. symbolization. In this way. namely a monograph or book. It is the study of culture. and language (which is also the object of study in linguistic anthropology). Ethnology involves the systematic comparison of different cultures. where anthropologists focus on understanding other primate populations. childrearing and socialization. linking the analysis of linguistic forms and processes to the interpretation of sociocultural processes. worldview. The process of participant-observation can be especially helpful to understanding a culture from an emic point of view. symbols. religion. all cultural anthropology is known as ethnology (a term coined and defined by Adam F. values. which are further subdivided according to artifact traditions and culture region. as kinship is a human universal. games. nutrition. and museums. food. Typically. Archaeologists also investigate nutrition. In some European countries.[9] The study of kinship and social organization is a central focus of cultural anthropology.[10]Archaeologists work closely with biological anthropologists. music. including both artifacts (older pieces of human culture) carefully gathered in situ. technology. art historians. art. the Bronze Age. Archaeology is the study of human material culture.evolutionary theory to understand phenomena among contemporary human populations. Archaeologists subdivide time into cultural periods based on long-lasting artifacts: thePaleolithic. systems of writing." or excavation of layers of ancient sites. the social uses of language. sports. Cultural anthropology also covers economic and political organization. their ways of making a living. which would otherwise be unattainable by simply reading from a book. Linguistic anthropologists often draw on related . Ethnography is a grounded. Another large sector of biological anthropology is primatology. material culture. archaeologists provide a vast frame of reference for the places human beings have traveled. Kollár in 1783). and is mainly based onethnography. primatologists borrow heavily from field biology and ecology in their research. Methodologically. verbal and non-verbal. festivals. infrastructure. archaeologists are associated with "digs. law and conflict resolution. gender relations. the Neolithic. They are charged with preserving the results of their excavations and are often found in museums. recreation. patterns of consumption and exchange. Cultural anthropology is also called socio-cultural anthropology or social anthropology(especially in the United Kingdom). ethnicity. and the relationship between language and culture. myth. It is the branch of anthropology that brings linguistic methods to bear on anthropological problems. physics laboratories (for dating). and other physical remnants of human cultural activity. inductive method that heavily relies on participant-observation. such as the Oldowan or the Gravettian.

philosophy and religious studies.[12] Because anthropology developed from so many different enterprises (see History of Anthropology). One of the central characteristics is that anthropology tends to provide a comparatively more holistic account of phenomena and tends to be highly empirical. evolving global culture.[citation needed] The quest for holism leads most anthropologists to study a particular place.[13][14] it is difficult to characterize the entire field in a brief article. marketing professionals employ anthropology to determine propitious placement of advertising. pragmatics. the study of the relationship between language and culture. historical linguistics. Anthropological linguistics is also concerned with the evolution of the parts of the brain that deal with language. of how an observer knows where his or her own culture ends and another begins. Because of the holistic nature of anthropological research. at Stanford. ethnolinguistics. genetics. Duke. using a variety of methods. primatology. etymology. discourse analysis. calls for clarification of what constitutes a culture. problem or phenomenon in detail. all branches of anthropology have widespread practical application in diverse fields. human-computer interaction. philology. In the 1990s and 2000s. although attempts to write histories of the entire field have been made. and natural sciences are forced to confront one another. regional analysis. and other crucial topics in writing anthropology were heard. Examples of applied anthropology are ubiquitous. It is possible to view all human cultures as part of one large. documentary film-making. global studies.[15] On the one hand this has led to instability in many American anthropology departments. including but not limited to fossil-hunting.[11] Linguistic anthropology is divided into its own sub-fields: descriptive linguistics the construction of grammars and lexicons for unstudied languages. These . [edit]Basic trends There are several characteristics that tend to unite anthropological work. including the reconstruction of past languages. and narrative analysis. and most recently at Harvard).g. over a more extensive period than normal in many parts of academia. resulting in the division or reorganization of sub-fields (e.fields including sociolinguistics. seen in a positive light. exploring. social. As such. semiotics.paleontology. Thus military expeditions employ anthropologists to discern strategic cultural footholds. the study of the social functions of language. anthropology has also been central in the development of several new (late 20th century) interdisciplinary fields such as cognitive science. and various ethnic studies. cognitive linguistics. and humanitarian agencies depend on anthropological insights as means to fight poverty. ethnology. andsociolinguistics. This is known as applied anthropology. anthropology is one of the few places in many American universities where humanities. from which our current languages have descended.[16] However. history. antiquity dealings and curatorship.

Topics like racism. biological. stretching across all the major and minor sub-fields. genetic samples. infanticide. as part of their quest for scientific objectivity. between what can be observed on the ground. such as "racism" and find thousands of anthropological references. therefore. ideas or concepts shared by virtually all human cultures)[19]They use many different methods of study. one can take just one of these topics. snake handling. of particular use in archaeology. . since mapping cultures is central to both sciences. participant observation and other techniques often take anthropologists "into the field" which means traveling to a community in its own setting. This is the notion that particular cultures should not be judged by one culture's values or viewpoints. Further cultural subdivisions according to tool types.[17] Biological anthropologists are interested in both human variation[18] and in the possibility of human universals (behaviors. which has an influence on all the sub-fields of anthropology. but modern population genetics. in good anthropology. such as Olduwan or Mousterian or Levalloisian help archaeologists and other anthropologists in understanding major trends in the human past. cultural relativism. anthropologists urge.[23][24] Along with dividing up their project by theoretical emphasis.dynamic relationships. anthropologists typically divide the world up into relevant time periods and geographic regions. There should be no notions. aberrations and other unusual circumstances. anthropologists are drawn to the study of human extremes. anthropologists have developed various kinds of comparative method. Human time on Earth is divided up into relevant cultural traditions based on material. mutilation including circumcision and subincision. whirling dervishes. and torture. just to list a few. To illustrate the depth of an anthropological approach. and glossolalia (speaking in tongues). whether there were real Hobbit people. to do something called "fieldwork. attract anthropological attention and theories ranging from nutritional deficiencies[21] to genes[22] to acculturation have been proposed. By making comparisons across cultural traditions (time-based) and cultural regions (space-based). whether cultural." On the biological or physical side. linguistic or archaeological. such as headhunting. Due to the interest in variation. not to mention theories of colonialism and many others as root causes of Man's inhumanity to man.racism. human measurements. Anthropologists and geographers share approaches to Culture regions as well. nutritional data may be gathered and published as articles or monographs. such as the Paleolithic and theNeolithic. of one culture being better or worse than another culture. a central part of their science.[20] Ethical commitments in anthropology include noticing and documenting genocide. but that all cultures should be viewed as relative to each other. as opposed to what can be observed by compiling many local observations remain fundamental in any kind of anthropology. At the same time. slavery or human sacrifice.

who wrote many of our only surviving contemporary accounts of several ancient Celtic and Germanic peoples. his Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View. however. Herodotus first formulated some of the persisting problems of anthropology. who wrote about the peoples.[29] Kant is not generally considered to be a modern anthropologist. and religions of the Indian subcontinent. the first of the "logies" to be coined. begin teaching an annual course in anthropology in 1772. Anthropology is thus primarily an Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment endeavor. specifically Herodotus. like Marvin Harris.Contemporary anthropology is an established science with academic departments at most universities and colleges. as he never left his region of Germany nor did he study any cultures besides his own. and geography are another example of studying human variation across space. paleontology.[30] He did.[34] Polo's travels took him across such a diverse human landscape and his accounts of the peoples he met as he journeyed were so detailed that they earned for Polo the name "the father of modern anthropology.zoology. and in fact. Like modern anthropologists. art history. physics.[32] Medieval scholars may be considered forerunners of modern anthropology as well. describes the need for anthropology as a corollary field to his own primary field of philosophy. sociology and so on. which was founded in 1903. and many anthropologists work with collaborators in other disciplines."[35] Another candidate for one of the first scholars to carry out comparative ethnographic-type studies in person was the medieval Persian scholar Abū Rayhān Bīrūnī in the 11th century. John of Plano Carpini reported of his stay among theMongols. music theory.[28] It took Immanuel Kant 25 years to write one of the first major treatises on anthropology. customs.[31] indicate two major frameworks within which empirical anthropology has arisen: interest in comparisons of people over space and interest in longterm human processes or humans as viewed through time.[25] Membership is made up of Anthropologists from around the globe. Harris dates both toClassical Greece and Classical Rome. Historians of anthropology.[27] [edit]History Main article: History of anthropology The first use of the term "anthropology" in English to refer to a natural science of humanity was apparently in 1593.[26] Hundreds of other organizations exist in the various sub-fields of anthropology. often called the "father of history" and the Roman historian Tacitus. sometimes divided up by nation or region. His report was unusual in its detailed depiction of a non-European culture[33] Marco Polo's systematic observations of nature. he engaged in . anatomy. The single largest organization of Anthropologists is the American Anthropological Association. insofar as they conducted or wrote detailed studies of the customs of peoples considered "different" from themselves in terms of geography. belonging to professional societies in those disciplines as well. such as geology. anthropology. however.

and presented his findings withobjectivity and neutrality using cross-cultural comparisons. whose work formed the basis for the "culture concept. He wrote detailed comparative studies on the religions and cultures in the Middle East. andsociology then evolved into something more closely resembling the modern views of these disciplines and informed the development of the social sciences. learnt their language and studied their primary texts. others argue that he can hardly be considered an anthropologist in the conventional sense. anthropology emerged from the development of natural history (expounded by authors such as Buffon) that occurred during the European colonization of the 17th. Table of natural history. philology." which is central to the discipline. Developments in the systematic study of ancient civilizations through the disciplines ofClassics and Egyptology informed both archaeology and eventually social anthropology. .extensive participant observation with a given group of people. theRomantic reaction to the Enlightenment produced thinkers. as did the study of East and South Asian languages and cultures.[38][39] Biruni's tradition of comparative cross-cultural study continued in the Muslim world through to Ibn Khaldun's work in the 14th century. a period when Europeans attempted systematically to study human behavior. such as Johann Gottfried Herderand later Wilhelm Dilthey. At the same time. [36] [37] However. the known varieties of which had been increasing since the 15th century as a result of thefirst European colonization wave. 1728Cyclopaedia Institutionally. 19th and 20th centuries.[36][40] Most scholars[citation needed] consider modern anthropology as an outgrowth of the Age of Enlightenment. of which anthropology was a part. history. The traditions of jurisprudence. Mediterranean and especially South Asia. 18th.

literature. and from purely historical or literary fields such as Classics. The social sciences have generally attempted to develop scientific methods to understand social phenomena in a generalizable way. The humanities generally study local traditions. music. on the other. social sciences often develop statistical descriptions rather than the general laws derived in physics or chemistry. [edit]20th century In the 20th century. In some ways. while anthropology focuses disproportionately on the "Other". region. sociologists. In particular. As academic disciplines began to differentiate over the course of the 19th century. or they may explain individual cases through more general principles. with an emphasis on understanding particular individuals. Early anthropology was divided between proponents of unilinealism. including anthropologists. physiology.[43] Anthropology as it emerged amongst the Western colonial powers (mentioned above) has generally taken a different path than that in the countries of southern and central Europe (Italy. Greece. through their history. . and arts.Programs of ethnographic study originated in this era as the study of the "human primitives" overseen by colonial administrations. and different branches of anthropology draw on one or more of these domains. There was a tendency in late 18th century Enlightenment thought to understand human society as natural phenomena that behaved according to certain principles and that could be observed empirically. on the one hand. studying the language. anthropology grew increasingly distinct from the biological approach of natural history. as in many fields of psychology. events. The natural and biological sciences seek to derive general laws through reproducible and verifiable experiments. though usually with methods distinct from those of the natural sciences. or ethnicity within Western societies. [42] this has changed over the last part of the 20th century as anthropologists increasingly also study Western subjects. particularly variation across class.[41] Most 19th-century social theorists. and other social scientists increasingly take a global view of their fields. the encounter with multiple. or eras. who tended to subscribe to ideas such as diffusionism. from the most primitive to the most advanced. and various forms of non-lineal theorists. and artifacts of European colonies was not unlike studying the flora and fauna of those places. viewed non-European societies as windows onto the pre-industrial human past. culture. A common criticism has been that many social science scholars (such as economists. academic disciplines have often been institutionally divided into three broad domains. In the former. who argued that all societies passed through a single evolutionary process. and psychologists) in Western countries focus disproportionately on Western subjects. and the successors to the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires). Anthropology (like some fields of history) does not easily fit into one of these categories.

Tylor ( 2 October 1832 – 2 January 1917) and James George Frazer ( 1 January 1854 – 7 May 1941) are generally considered the antecedents to modern social anthropology in Britain. were highly shaped by the requirement to conform to Marxist theories of social evolution. Ethnologists in these countries tended to focus on differentiating among local ethnolinguistic groups. similar to the situation in the Americas. both he and Frazer derived most of the material for their comparative . often non-literate peoples. pre-industrial. on the other hand.distinct cultures. museums of several kinds). B. and later the Soviet Bloc countries. has led to a continuing emphasis on cross-cultural comparison and a receptiveness to certain kinds of cultural relativism.[46] [edit]Countries [edit]Britain E. 19th-century British anthropologist. On the other hand. Tylor. anthropology in the USSR. documenting local folk culture.[45] In this scheme. Russia occupied a middle position. it had a large region (largely east of the Urals) of highly distinct. After the Revolution of 1917. Though Tylor undertook a field trip toMexico. anthropologists often joined with folklorists and linguists in building nationalist perspectives. B. Russia also participated to some degree in the nationalist (cultural and political) movements of Central and Eastern Europe. and representing the prehistory of what has become a nation through various forms of public education (eg. E. On the one hand.[44] In the successor states of continental Europe. often very different in organization and language from those of Europe.

travelers. and contemporaneous ethnologists. concerned with analyzing how societies held together in the present (synchronic analysis. as Stocking notes. The findings of the expedition set new standards for ethnographic description. and magic. historical reconstructions also came to seem increasingly speculative. A decade and a half later. morals. art. were particularly interested in fieldwork. myth. multilineal cultural development proposed by later anthropologists. Under the influence of several younger scholars. inheritance from ancestors in a distant region. transmission from one race [sic] to another. most influentially in the numerous editions of The Golden Bough. the work of the early European folklorists. and generally seemed to assume a Victorian idea of progress rather than the idea of nondirectional. Frazer. rather than with the larger function. when the outbreak of the First World War stranded him in New Guinea. stating that there are three ways that different groups can have similar cultural forms or technologies: "independent invention. custom. rather than diachronic or historical analysis). and reports from missionaries. and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society. also concerned himself with religion. a Scottish scholar with a broad knowledge of Classics. other specialists. law. however. Tylor also theorized about the origins of religious feelings in human beings."[49] However. etc. belief. His comparative studies. Toward the turn of the 20th century. Polish anthropology student Bronisław Malinowski (1884–1942) was beginning what he expected to be a brief period of fieldwork in the old model. and emphasizing long-term (one to several years) immersion fieldwork. Cambridge University financed amultidisciplinary expedition to the Torres Strait Islands in 1898. cosmology. a new approach came to predominate among British anthropologists. and noting that "religion" has many components. as well as a linguist. nor were they interested in examining how the cultural elements and institutions fit together. of which he believed the most important to be belief in supernatural beings (as opposed to moral systems.[47] Tylor in particular laid the groundwork for theories ofcultural diffusionism. Tylor mainly concerned himself with describing and mapping the distribution of particular elements of culture. collecting lists of cultural items. William Rivers. Tylor advocated strongly for unilinealism and a form of "uniformity of mankind"."[48] Tylor formulated one of the early and influential anthropological conceptions of culture as "that complex whole which includes knowledge. organized by Alfred Court Haddon and including a physiciananthropologist.studies through extensive reading. a botanist.). a number of anthropologists became dissatisfied with this categorization of cultural elements. As a subject of the Austro-Hungarian . not fieldwork. proposing a theory of animism as the earliest stage. Neither Tylor nor Frazer. mainly the Classics (literature and history of Greece and Rome). analyzed similarities in religious belief and symbolism globally.

which examined the conceptual structures in language and symbolism. it "contributed to the erosion ofChristianity. Argonauts of the Western Pacific(1922) advocated an approach to fieldwork that became standard in the field: getting "the native's point of view" through participant observation. and was quite different from the later French structuralism. collectively known as the Manchester School. From the late 1930s until the postwar period appeared a string of monographs and edited volumes that cemented the paradigm of British Social Anthropology (BSA). British social anthropology had an expansive moment in the Interwar period. However.[50] He made use of the time by undertaking far more intensive fieldwork than had been done byBritish anthropologists. Radcliffe-Brown published an account of his research (entitled simply The Andaman Islanders) that paid close attention to the meaning and purpose of rituals and myths. Max Gluckman. took BSA in new directions through their introduction of explicitly Marxist-informed theory. he advocated afunctionalist interpretation. with key contributions coming from the Polish-British Bronisław Malinowski and Meyer Fortes[51] A. which focused on how institutions in societies worked to balance out or create an equilibrium in the social system to keep it functioning harmoniously. and their attention to the ways in which individuals negotiate and make use of the social structural possibilities. He had carried out his initial fieldwork in the Andaman Islands in the old style of historical reconstruction. Radcliffe-Brown also published a seminal work in 1922.Empire resident on a British colonial possession. who spread his agenda for "Social Anthropology" by teaching at universities across the British Commonwealth. (This contrasted with Malinowski's functionalism. the growth of cultural relativism. an awareness of the survival of the primitive in modern life."[52] . all of which are central to modern culture. which examined how social institutions functioned to satisfy individual needs. like Boas. This was particularly the case with Radcliffe-Brown. and The Dynamics of Clanship Among the Tallensi. and his classic ethnography. by Edward Evan Evans-Pritchard.) Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown's influence stemmed from the fact that they. their emphasis on conflicts and conflict resolution. after reading the work of French sociologists Émile Durkheim and Marcel Mauss. and the replacement of diachronic modes of analysis with synchronic. he was effectively confined to New Guinea for several years. Over time. well-known edited volumes include African Systems of Kinship and Marriage and African Political Systems. together with many of his colleagues at the Rhodes-Livingstone Institute and students at Manchester University. actively trained students and aggressively built up institutions that furthered their programmatic ambitions. Famous ethnographies include The Nuer. In Britain. R. he developed an approach known as structural-functionalism. Theoretically. anthropology had a great intellectual impact. by Meyer Fortes.

cultural studies. social anthropology in Britain engages internationally with many other social theories and has branched in many directions. a Cambridge University trained anthropologist who went on to become a senior editor at the Financial Times is one of the leaders in this use of anthropology. differences among British. and social work. and from archaeology. ethnic studies. social anthropology has often been institutionally separate from physical anthropology and primatology. and the like.Later in the 1960s and 1970s. while British anthropology has continued to emphasize social organization and economics over purely symbolic or literary topics.Gillian Tett. Today. among others. Anthropology has been used in Britain to provide an alternative explanation for the Financial crisis of 2007–2010 to the technical explanations rooted in economic and political theory. sociology. introduced French structuralism in the style of Lévi-Strauss. museum studies. anthropology in the United States was influenced by the presence of Native American societies. French. Egyptology. particularly smaller. Franz Boas. [edit]United States [edit]19th Century to 1940s From its beginnings in the early 19th century through the early 20th century. Dr. which may be connected with departments of biology or zoology. human geography. In other countries (and in some. In countries of the British Commonwealth. one of the pioneers of modern anthropology. social relations. and American sociocultural anthropologies have diminished with increasing dialogue and borrowing of both theory and methods. Edmund Leach and his students Mary Douglas and Nur Yalman. anthropologists have also found themselves institutionally linked with scholars of folklore. often called the "Father of American Anthropology" . British and North American universities). which may be connected with departments of Classics.

Influenced by the German tradition. and especially kinship patterns proved to be influential contributions to the field of anthropology.Cultural anthropology in the United States was influenced greatly by the ready availability of Native American societies as ethnographic subjects. a lawyer fromRochester. Anthropology in the United States continues to be deeply influenced by the Boasian tradition. government. Boas argued that the world was full of distinct cultures. Morgan used technology (such as bowmaking or pottery) as an indicator of position on this scale. tocivilization. In doing so. and argued that cross-cultural generalizations. [54] Many American anthropologists adopted his agenda for social reform.g. he fought discrimination against immigrants. men such as John Wesley Powell and Frank Hamilton Cushing. and archaic anthropology (e. . His approach was empirical. Morgan argued that human societies could be classified into categories of cultural evolution on a scale of progression that ranged from savagery. linguistic. and that human conduct and behavior resulted from nurture. The field was pioneered by staff of theBureau of Indian Affairs and the Smithsonian Institution's Bureau of American Ethnology. rather than nature. were not possible. Like other scholars of his day (such as Edward Tylor). Generally. material culture. to barbarism. Boas studied immigrant children to demonstrate that biological race was not immutable. became an advocate for and ethnological scholar of the Iroquois. biological. The so-called "Four Field Approach" has its origins in Boasian Anthropology. archaeology). New York.[53] [edit]Boasian anthropology Franz Boas established academic anthropology in the United States in opposition to this sort of evolutionary perspective. skeptical of overgeneralizations. dividing the discipline in the four crucial and interrelated fields of sociocultural. like those made in the natural sciences. His comparative analyses of religion. especially its emphasis on culture. For example.rather than societies whose evolution could be measured by how much or how little "civilization" they had. and indigenous peoples of the Americas. and eschewed attempts to establish universal laws. blacks. Lewis Henry Morgan (1818–1881). He believed that each culture has to be studied in its particularity. and theories of race continue to be popular subjects for anthropologists today.

. In Canada. but she was sidelined byRalph Linton. Though such works as Coming of Age in Samoa and The Chrysanthemum and the Swordremain popular with the American public. [edit]Canada Canadian anthropology began. Boas had planned for Ruth Benedict to succeed him as chair of Columbia's anthropology department. They provided a wealth of details used to attack the theory of a single evolutionary process. who each produced richly detailed studies of indigenous North American cultures. Influenced by psychoanalytic psychologists including Sigmund Freud and Carl Jung. Jesuit missionaries such as Fathers LeClercq. as in other parts of the Colonial world. in the 17th century. marked a turning point in American anthropology.Anthropology. Robert Lowie. Kroeber and Sapir's focus on Native American languages helped establish linguistics as a truly general science and free it from its historical focus on Indo-European languages. The publication of Alfred Kroeber's textbook. as ethnological data in the records of travellers and missionaries.Ruth Benedict in 1937 Boas used his positions at Columbia Universityand the American Museum of Natural History to train and develop multiple generations of students. Boasians felt a growing urge to generalize. Mead and Benedict never had the impact on the discipline of anthropology that some expected. Le Jeune and Sagard. and Mead was limited to her offices at the AMNH. these authors sought to understand the way that individual personalities were shaped by the wider cultural and social forces in which they grew up. This was most obvious in the 'Culture and Personality' studies carried out by younger Boasians such as Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict. Edward Sapir and Ruth Benedict. His first generation of students included Alfred Kroeber. After three decades of amassing material. provide the oldest ethnographic records of native tribes in what was then the Domain of Canada.

Mauss and his collaborators (such as Henri Hubert and Robert Hertz) drew on ethnography and philology to analyze societies which were not as 'differentiated' as European nation states. the first comparative study of notions of person and selfhood cross-culturally. Two works by Mauss in particular proved to have enduring relevance: Essay on the Gift a seminal analysis of exchange and reciprocity. Mauss belonged to Durkheim's Année Sociologique group. Anthropologists were recruited from England and the USA. in part because many French writers influential in anthropology have been trained or held faculty positions in sociology. and his Huxley lecture on the notion of the person. This was expanded upon by Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier. who established a Division of Anthropology within the Geological Survey in 1910.True anthropology began with a Government department: the Geological Survey of Canada. philosophy. nephew of the influential sociologistÉmile Durkheim to be the founder of the French anthropological tradition.[55] . setting the foundation for the unique Canadian style of anthropology. and while Durkheim and others examined the state of modern societies. Dawson's support for anthropology created impetus for the profession in Canada. or other fields rather than in anthropology. and George Mercer Dawson (director in 1895). Most commentators consider Marcel Mauss(1872–1950). Scholars include the linguist and Boasian Edward Sapir. [edit]France Émile Durkheim Anthropology in France has a less clear genealogy than the British and American traditions.

in the form of "a science of the interior". while his analysis of the function and reproduction of fashion and cultural capital in European societies places him as solidly in sociology. Above all. however.[citation needed] In Greece. At the same time he established centers and laboratories within France to provide an institutional context within anthropology while training influential students such as Maurice Godelier andFrançoise Héritier who would prove influential in the world of French anthropology. The leader is only a spokesperson for the group when it has to deal with other groups ("international relations") but has no inside authority. who explains in his books on the Guayaki tribe in Paraguay that "primitive societies" actively oppose the institution of thestate. and may be violently removed if he attempts to abuse this position. Much of the distinct character of France's anthropology today is a result of the fact that most anthropology is carried out in nationally funded research laboratories (CNRS) rather than academic departments in universities. but took the active choice of conjuring the institution of authority as a separate function from society. His fieldwork among the Kabyles of Algeria places him solidly in anthropology. Therefore. there was since the 19th century a science of thefolklore called laographia (laography).[56] The most important French social theorist since Foucault and Lévi-Strauss is Pierre Bourdieu. these stateless societies are not less evolved than societies with states. he worked on topics both in sociology and anthropology. During this time most of what is known asethnologie was restricted to museums. [edit]Other countries Anthropology in Greece and Portugal is much influenced by British anthropology. Like Mauss and others before him. when a wave of Anglo-American anthropologists introduced a science "of the outside".Throughout the interwar years. Along with the enormous influence his structuralism exerted across multiple disciplines. Lévi-Strauss established ties with American and British anthropologists. who trained formally in philosophy and sociology and eventually held the Chair of Sociology at the Collège de France. Marcel Griaule and Michel Leiris are examples of people who combined anthropology with the French avantgarde. Other influential writers in the 1970s include Pierre Clastres. although theoretically weak. such as the Musée de l'Homme founded by Paul Rivet. [57] In Italy. the development of ethnology and related studies did not receive as much attention as other branches of learning. French interest in anthropology often dovetailed with wider cultural movements such as surrealism and primitivism which drew on ethnography for inspiration. but the connotation of the field deeply changed after World War II. it was Claude Lévi-Strauss who helped institutionalize anthropology in France. and anthropology had a close relationship with studies of folklore. however.[58] .

Germany and Norway are the countries that showed the most division and conflict between scholars focusing on domestic socio-cultural issues and scholars focusing on "other" societies. They were . Derrida and Lacan. particularly how and why anthropological knowledge was possible and authoritative. which proved very popular within and beyond the discipline. focused on processes of modernization by which newly independent states could develop. In the 1950s and mid-1960s anthropology tended increasingly to model itself after the natural sciences. enough British and American anthropologists borrowed ideas and methodological approaches from one another that some began to speak of them collectively as 'sociocultural' anthropology.[citation needed] [edit]Post-World War II Before WWII British 'social anthropology' and American 'cultural anthropology' were still distinct traditions. After the war. while the immense popularity of theorists such as Antonio Gramsci and Michel Foucaultmoved issues of power and hegemony into the spotlight. Clifford Geertz.[61] In the late 1980s and 1990s authors such as George Marcus and James Clifford pondered ethnographic authority. Economic anthropology as influenced by Karl Polanyi and practiced by Marshall Sahlins andGeorge Dalton challenged standard neoclassical economics to take account of cultural and social factors. includingcognitive anthropology and componential analysis. Others. In keeping with the times. the critical theory of the Frankfurt School. who drew on Lévi-Strauss and Fernand Braudel to examine the relationship between social structure and individual agency. have been central to the discipline. as did the relationship between history and anthropology. Some anthropologists. and employed Marxian analysis into anthropological study. Also influential in these issues were Nietzsche. such as Lloyd Fallers and Clifford Geertz. Since the 1980s issues of power. In the 80s books likeAnthropology and the Colonial Encounter pondered anthropology's ties to colonial inequality. Authors such as David Schneider. focused on how societies evolve and fit their ecological niche—an approach popularized by Marvin Harris. British Social Anthropology's paradigm began to fragment as Max Gluckman and Peter Worsleyexperimented with Marxism and authors such as Rodney Needham and Edmund Leachincorporated Lévi-Strauss's structuralism into their work. such as those examined in Eric Wolf's Europe and the People Without History. Heidegger. and Marshall Sahlins developed a more fleshed-out concept of culture as a web of meaning or signification. influenced byMarshall Sahlins (again). Gender and sexuality became popular topics. In England.[60] By the 1970s the authors of volumes such as Reinventing Anthropology worried about anthropology's relevance. much of anthropology became politicized through the Algerian War of Independence and opposition to the Vietnam War. Structuralism also influenced a number of developments in 1960s and 1970s. such as Julian Steward and Leslie White. [59] Marxism became an increasingly popular theoretical approach in the discipline.

Pels and Salemink. Lewis 2004).[66]  That ethnographic work was often ahistorical. writing about people as if they were "out of time" in an "ethnographic present" (Johannes Fabian. and their influence on his or her ethnographic analysis. gender and racial positioning. David H. but cf. although they excused themselves from commenting specifically on those pioneering critics. and derived some of its key notions from it.reflecting trends in research and discourse initiated by Feminists in the academy. (See. government. explicitly addressing the author's methodology.[67] Many anthropologists (students and teachers) were active in the .S. consciously or not. key aspects of feminist theorizing and methods becamede rigueur as part of the 'post-modern moment' in anthropology: Ethnographies became more reflexive. many of Boas' anthropologist contemporaries were active in the allied war effort against the "Axis" (Nazi Germany. Attempts to accuse anthropologists of complicity with the CIA and government intelligence activities during the Vietnam War years have turned up surprisingly little (although anthropologist Hugo Nutini was active in the stillborn Project Camelot). has caused bitter controversy within the discipline. Franz Boas publicly objected to US participation in World War I. Many served in the armed forces.[64][65] Some commentators have contended:  That the discipline grew out of colonialism. while others worked in intelligence (for example. indigenous rights. like other researchers (especially historians and scientists engaged in field research). cultural. Fascist Italy. and the anthropology of industrialized societies. Time and Its Other). and Imperial Japan). [edit]Controversies about its history Anthropologists. Office of Strategic Services and the Office of War Information). But by the 1940s. in particular. especially colonialism. for example. including globalization. Gough. medicine and biotechnology. virtual communities. At the same time.[62] Nevertheless. perhaps was in league with it. [edit]Military Anthropologists' involvement with the U. have over time assisted state policies and projects.[63] Currently anthropologists pay attention to a wide variety of issues pertaining to the contemporary world. and after the war he published a brief expose and condemnation of the participation of several American archaeologists in espionage in Mexico under their cover as scientists. This was part of a more general trend of postmodernism that was popular contemporaneously. Price's work on American anthropology during the Cold War provides detailed accounts of the pursuit and dismissal of several anthropologists from their jobs for communist sympathies.

antiwar movement and a great many resolutions condemning the war in all its aspects were passed overwhelmingly at the annual meetings of the American Anthropological Association (AAA).[72] In France. both in terms of time (past societies) and space (non-European/non-Westernsocieties). anthropologists who traditionally specialized in "other cultures" looked for them far away and started to look "across the tracks" only in late 1960s. the study of existing contemporary society has been traditionally left tosociologists. Ulf Hannerz in the introduction to his seminal Exploring the City: Inquiries Toward an Urban Anthropology mentions that the "Third World" had habitually received most of attention.[68] The Christian Science Monitor reports that "Counterinsurgency efforts focus on better grasping and meeting local needs" in in Afghanistan. no secret reports or debriefings of any kind should be agreed to or given. no secret research. anthropologists.. the Anthropological Research Center of Contemporary Societies). under the Human Terrain System (HTS) program. along with other social scientists.[citation needed] [edit]See also Anthropology portal . like History and Sociology. additionally.[73] starting in the 1970s from scholars likeIsac Chiva and journals like Terrain ("fieldwork"). on the contrary focus disproportionately on the West.[61] It is also argued that other fields of study. are working with the US military as part of the US Army's strategy in Afghanistan.. but this is increasingly changing.[69] [edit]Major [edit]Focus discussions on other cultures Some authors argue that anthropology originated and developed as the study of "other cultures". Their codes of ethics or statements may proscribe anthropologists from giving secret briefings. the classic of urban anthropology. HTS teams are working with the US military in Iraq. The same approach of focusing on "modern world" topics by Terrain. was also present in the British Manchester School of the 1950s. The AAA's current 'Statement of Professional Responsibility' clearly states that "in relation with their own government and with host governments . The Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and Commonwealth(ASA) has called certain scholarships ethically dangerous." However. and developing with the center founded byMarc Augé (Le Centre d'anthropologie des mondes contemporains.[70] For example.[71] Now there exist many works focusing on peoples and topics very close to the author's "home". Professional anthropological bodies often object to the use of anthropology for the benefit of the state.

Book:Anthropology Books are collections of articles that can be downloaded or ordered in print. which is not part of anthropology but a sub-field of theology Periodic Table of Human Sciences / Anthropology in Tinbergen's four questions . AIBR Ethnology Ethology Folklore Human ethology Human evolution Intangible Cultural Heritage Legal anthropology Madison Grant Memetics Philosophical anthropology Prehistoric medicine Phronetic social science Sociology Systems theory in anthropology Theological anthropology. Main article: Outline of anthropology                       American Anthropological Association (AAA) Anthropological Index Online (AIO) Anthrozoology Anthropological science fiction Applied anthropology Asociación de Antropólogos Iberoamericanos en Red.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.