4 ABORIGINES - Sage Publications

AA4 ABORIGINES

The word aborigine means “from the beginning.” InAustralia, this word began to be used to refer specifi-cally to the continent’s nearly one million indigenousinhabitants at the time of the British invasion in 1788.Many cultures have been lost since then, due to violentconflict between Aborigines and successive waves ofnew settlers. Some cultures have survived and renewedtheir focus on kin networks, close religious and legalrelationships to the land, and revitalization of theirculture and language. Of 250 languages, 20 remain.

Experts believe ancestral Aborigines arrived approx-imately 46,000 years ago, possibly when sea levels werelow during the Ice Age. Archaeological sites nearMelbourne and Perth are dated to 40,000 years ago,shell middens to 30,000 years ago. Indigenous peoplesof Australia and New Guinea, closely related, probablyshare a common origin in Indonesia. Aboriginal lan-guage diversified into a large number of families withno clear relationships, suggesting a much longer periodof differentiation than the single Austronesian lan-guage family had in the South Pacific.

Early tools consisted of flakes and pieces of stonewith sharp edges. Ground-edged hatchet heads foundin the North were the only prehistoric tools shapedinto regular patterns. From 3000 BC, stone toolsspread throughout the continent and may have beenused as currency as well as for woodworking.

The clan, the most important social group, movedwithin a specific tract of land in response to seasonalvariation or the need to be at a specific place for ritualpurposes. Clans were linked as part of exchange net-works that moved objects or ideas over long distances.They also maintained and transmitted culture withimages and songs describing creation, short songs

containing powerful information related to specificlocalities, and series of songs strung together in songlines. Rock and body painting and decoration ofportable objects linked clans to the land, each other,and the past.

Aboriginal people believed in the continuing exis-tence of spirit-being ancestors who lived on earthduring “the Dreaming” and created the natural worldbefore the arrival of humans. They took various formsrepresented by totems and behaved as people. Theyaged and had to return to the sleep from which theyawoke at the dawn of time, but they continued toinfluence natural events and breathe life into new-borns. Their wisdom regarding kinship, hunting, andmarriage relationships was highly desired.

Australian Aborigines were hunter-gatherers iden-tified by a managerial forager prehistoric lifestyle thatincluded vegetation burning, replanting, and occa-sional wetland ditching, depending on available nat-ural resources. In western Victoria, elaborate systemswere constructed for trapping eels. In northern wet-lands, tubers were replanted to promote futuregrowth. Elsewhere, wells were sunk to raise large cropsof yams; trees were transplanted; streams werediverted for irrigation; and digging was undertakento encourage roots. Fire was widely used to open path-ways, kill vermin, remove dry vegetation and promotenew growth, cook edible animals in their burrows andnests, and prevent more destructive natural fires. Yetwhen Europeans saw these methods of managinggrasslands and diversifying plant and animal life, theydid not recognize Aborigines as farmers, gardeners, orherders. Absence of defined fields, permanent villages,and edible domestic animals led them to regardAboriginal country as unproductive and unclaimed.Aborigines seemed to be wanderers, an inferiorpeople who were not using the land and who should

1

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AB ORIGINES2

be forcibly removed to make way for colonization.Australia was annexed to the British Empire on thebasis that it was terra nullius, or uninhabited waste-land. This myth prevailed until 1992, when a HighCourt judged in the Mabo case that native title to landstill existed in Australia.

— Susan Schroeder

See also Australian Aborigines

Further Readings

Elkin, A. P. (1954). The Australian Aborigines: How tounderstand them. Sydney, Australia: Angus &Robertson.

Swain, T. (1993). A place for strangers: Towards ahistory of Australian Aboriginal being. Cambridge;New York: Cambridge University Press.

Tindale, N. B. (1974). Aboriginal tribes of Australia:Their terrain, environmental controls, distribution,limits, and proper names. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press.

ABORIGINES

Cultural anthropologists have long been fascinatedby the study of Australian Aborigines, and manyforeign anthropologists have emigrated to Australiato study Aborigines. The new arrivals oftenoutnumber local anthropologists at academicinstitutions. In addition to the historical aspects ofAborigine studies, cultural anthropologists as well associal scientists have become concerned with myriadproblems that have surfaced as Aborigines havebeen acclimatized into mainstream Australian life.

The quality of education in many indigenouscommunities lags behind standards for Australiansin general, resulting in lower literacy rates and adeficit of basic skills needed to prepare youngpeople for facing the realities of the adult world.Aborigines in the most remote areas also lackquality health care and a general knowledge of howpoor sanitation makes individuals more susceptibleto certain diseases. For instance, in the remote areaof Mulan, where more than 60% of Aborigine

children have been stricken with blindness-inducingtrachoma, the Australian government agreed toimprove fuel access only if local authoritiesguaranteed that Aborigine children would takedaily showers and wash their hands at least twice aday and that residents would regularly removehousehold garbage. The infant morality rate amongAborigines is 6 times that of the White population.Aborigines are also more likely than otherAustralians to die from health-related causes aswell as from violence.

The Australian government announced in late2004 that welfare policies have created a cycle oflifelong dependency among Aborigines, while doinglittle to change the endemic problems of Aborigineacclimatization. These include lower life expectancy,chronic alcoholism, and high rates of domesticviolence. The Australian reported on December 16,2004, that Aborigine males born between 1996and 2001 face a life expectancy of 59.4 yearscompared with 77.8 years for their white malecounterparts. While comparable Aborigine femalesfare better with a life expectancy of 64.8 years, thatnumber lags far behind the 82.8-year lifeexpectancy of their white female counterparts.Experts believe that incidences of alcoholism andthe flogging deaths of Aborigine wives by theirhusbands are a result of poverty and alienation.Prime Minister John Howard of the Liberal Party hasproposed reforms that stress Aborigine self-help andindependence.

Charges of racism have threatened Aborigineacclimatization, leading some experts to claim thatthe country is in the midst of a racial crisis. Thisissue exploded in late 2004 after publication of areport by the Equal Opportunity Commission (EOC).The commission’s investigation revealed thatAborigine families in Western Australia who makeup 18% of the tenants of Homeswest, a publichousing complex, were 3 times more likely to beevicted for allegedly being behind with their rent,damaging property, or being socially incompatiblewith their white neighbors.

As proof of Homeswest’s racism, the EOC pointedto the fact that most Aborigine tenants wererelegated to inferior housing, which in many caseshad been scheduled for demolition. Theinvestigation also uncovered evidence that thehousing authority’s staff was trained to treat Black

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ACHEULEAN CULTURE 3

4 ACHEULEAN CULTURE

The Acheulean stone tool “culture” refers to the suiteof typological characteristics associated with thestone tool technology of the later part of the LowerPaleolithic or Early Stone Age. In terms of stone toolculture chronology, the Acheulean culture immedi-ately follows the Oldowan culture in Africa, and con-temporary industries that possibly existed elsewherein the world, and precedes the Middle Paleolithic orMiddle Stone Age. The range of dates associated withthe Acheulean is the subject of some controversy,although the general consensus is that it began around1.6 my and ended around 200 ky.

The Acheulean was distributed throughout thetropical and temperate zones of the Old World.Acheulean sites are found over most of Africa (withthe possible exception of tropical forested regions),range into the Near East and India, and extend intoNorthern and Western Europe. The earliest occur-rences of the Acheulean culture are seen in the RiftValley of East Africa. The Acheulean was present inthe Near East and India certainly no later than 1 myand perhaps as early as 1.4 my. The Acheuleanappeared in Europe no later than 800 ky. Until

recently, hand axes were not thought to be present inSoutheast Asia, which was thought to be dividedfrom Europe and the Near East by the so-calledMovius Line, named for Harvard prehistorian HallamMovius. Recent discoveries in Southeast Asia havecalled this conventional understanding into question.It appears now that the Acheulean may have been pre-sent in Southeast Asia as early as 800 ky, dependingon how the Acheulean is defined.

The Acheulean culture ranged remarkably widelyin terms of both geography and chronology. It there-fore likely represents the product of a substantialdiversity of hominids, including Homo ergaster, Homoerectus, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis,and Homo sapiens. Much of this, of course, is depen-dent upon how hominid phylogeny is arranged.

History of Research

The Acheulean culture has an important place in OldWorld Paleolithic prehistory. The defining character-istic of the Acheulean is the presence of large bifacialreduced core tools, conventionally called “hand axes”or “cleavers.” The most remarkable feature of theAcheulean culture is the persistence of hand axes overan incredible duration of time—almost the entirecourse of the Pleistocene. Over the course of theAcheulean, hand axes gradually became thinner andmore refined, incorporating technological advancessuch as core platform preparation. However, the over-all design and shape of hand axes changed very slowlyand remained remarkably consistent. This is the caseboth within individual sites that contain records oflong periods of time and more generally across theOld World in prehistory.

The persistence of the Acheulean hand axe repre-sents a substantial research problem, with numerousproposed explanations. These possibilities includeinherited biological programming for hand axe man-ufacture, sexual signaling using hand axes, culturalinstruction of offspring by parents for the productionof hand axes, or simply the functional unity of aneffective technological design, which was inventedand utilized innumerable times in prehistory. Theexplanations are too numerous to list here, and thereis extremely little consensus concerning this problem.

Hand axes were among the first stone tools recog-nized by modern prehistorians in Europe, likelybecause of their distinctive appearance. John Frere, anEnglish scientist writing at the end of the 18th century,

and white tenants differently and that the staffadvised white tenants on how to successfully lodgecomplaints against their Aborigine neighbors,heightening chances of eviction.

While Homeswest stated that it hadimplemented 43% of the committee’srecommendations, the executive director rejectedthe remaining 57%, claiming that they smacked ofpaternalism. Rejected recommendations includedmoving overcrowded Aborigine families into better,more spacious quarters rather than evicting them,because many of the problems had resulted fromovercrowding. Recommendations implemented byHomeswest included cultural training for staffmembers and an agreement to conduct interviewswith tenants privately rather than publicly, as hadbeen done in the past.

— Elizabeth Purdy

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ACHEULEAN CULTURE4

is frequently cited as the first to recognize hand axesand other Acheulean implements as the results ofancient human activity. However, the Acheuleanculture is named for the type site of Saint-Acheul,discovered along the Somme River of France duringthe mid-19th century by Jacques Boucher de Perthes.In addition, the observation of hand axes in associa-tion with the bones of extinct animal species at siteslike Saint-Acheul was instrumental in the recognitionof the antiquity of human presence in Europe, as wellas the rest of the world. Among these early researchersof hand axes were the pioneer geological prehistori-ans, such as Boucher de Perthes and Gabriel deMortillet, working in the mid-1800s. These scholarsand their contemporaries saw hand axes as “type fos-sils,” indicative of the earliest time periods of humanprehistory in the same way that animal fossil speci-mens were used to date ancient geological layers.

Likewise, hand axes were noticed by archaeolo-gists working in Africa very early at sites such asStellenbosch, and this lent support to speculationconcerning the early origins of humans on that conti-nent. Here, hand axes became important features ofstone tool typologies as early as the 1920s. Hand axesand their stratigraphic associations were extremelyimportant to Louis Leakey’s early work in Kenya. Heused hand axes as a linchpin in developing a stone

tool chronology for East Africa.Among the most prominent of thenatural historians to discuss thesubject of hand axes and theAcheulean culture was ThomasHenry Huxley, who saw suchstone tool industries as indicativeof the sophistication of earlyhumans.

By the first part of the 20th cen-tury, archaeologists were begin-ning to conventionally speak ofthe Acheulean culture as a ubiqui-tous industry of the earlyPaleolithic in the Old World. Itwas during this time that archae-ologists began to speak of “theAcheulean” as a unitary set ofstone tool types significant of aspecific time range. In this con-text, the term was basicallyentirely restricted to chronology.It is important to understand that

stone typology was one of the few methods fordetermining the age of archaeological sites. By iden-tifying sequences of archaeological cultures, such asthe Acheulean, with consistent sets of attributes,it was possible to determine the relative age ofarchaeological sites. With the Acheulean, the termwas used to describe the relative position of stonetool remains in the chronology of the Paleolithic.The Acheulean has never really been used as adescriptive term for any patterns of behavior associ-ated with this time period.

The Emergence of Modern Viewpoints

The emergence of chronometric dating techniques inthe mid-20th century significantly changed the placeof the Acheulean culture concept. This took the bur-den off of analysis of stone tools in terms of deter-mining the age of archaeological sites and freedanalysis to answer questions of behavior and culturechange. Because of the newer importance of ques-tions inferring behavior, the Acheulean culture hasbeen defined using other technological characteris-tics, taking emphasis away from hand axes as typespecimens almost exclusively defining the culture.These features include centripetal removal of flakesfrom cores, bifacial removal of flakes, low frequencies

Source: © Kathleen Cohen.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ACHEULEAN CULTURE 5

of “formal” or shaped or retouched tools, and largeassemblages of unmodified flakes. In certain techno-logical vocabularies, the Acheulean is referred to as“Mode 2” technology because of the presence of thesefeatures. In general, the Acheulean is characterized bysimple flake reduction, without much evidence ofcore preparation until the transition to the MiddlePaleolithic or Middle Stone Age. The early Acheuleanis marked by deep, aggressive flake removal usingstone hammers, while the later Acheulean is definedby more refined flaking using bone, wood, or antlerhammers, especially in the thinning of bifaces.

The emphasis on hand axes as markers of theAcheulean was also largely based on the assumptionthat such core tools were the functional parts of thetechnology; flakes were viewed as waste products ofthe manufacturing process. More recent studies haverecognized flakes as the most useful part of Acheuleantechnology, because they have a much sharper edgethan either core tools like hand axes or retouched “for-mal” tools. This has somewhat challenged the validityof defining this culture as using hand axes so exclu-sively. In fact, this newer view sees cores, such as handaxes, as the waste product of flake production—theexact reverse of the classical notion. In this revisedview, the Acheulean is no longer defined by thedesigned manufacture of specific tool types like handaxes, but instead by specific strategies of flake manu-facture, core reduction, and lithic raw material econ-omy. Because of this, more recent scholarship has beenextremely wary of the hand axe as typological marker.

In addition, after the dating advances in the mid-20th century, numerous sites appeared within thedate range associated with the Acheulean, but theylacked hand axes. Oftentimes, sites without hand axeswere even in close geographical proximity with con-temporary sites containing hand axes. Such contem-porary sites lacking hand axes have often beenreferred to as belonging to the “Developed Oldowan”industry, because of their presumed connection withthe earlier culture. However, the Developed Oldowanis a term that has largely fallen out of favor withinPaleolithic archaeology. Quickly, it became apparentthat a number of factors affected whether or nothand axes were deposited at a given site, includingthe availability of appropriate raw material and theoccurrence of technological problems for whichthe manufacture of hand axes was a solution. Theabsence of hand axes could not, by itself, indicate aseparate technological culture. These rationales have

also been used to explain the scarcity of hand axeseast of the Movius Line. The geology of SoutheastAsia is characterized largely by sedimentary contexts,which seldom produce the quality of raw materialneeded for hand axe manufacture found in Europe,the Near East, or Africa.

Further complicating the definition of the Acheuleantied to the presence of hand axes, with refinement ofabsolute dating techniques, many archaeological siteswith hand axes were dated outside of the range usuallyassociated with the Acheulean. This was especially thecase in Europe, where numerous well-documentedsites with hand axes were dated to surprisingly late inthe Middle Paleolithic. For example, the Mousterian-of-Acheulean culture of the European Middle Pale-olithic is defined by the presence of hand axes butoccurs long after the end of the Acheulean in thatregion. Furthermore, it is unclear whether the handaxes present in the Mousterian-of-Acheulean traditionoperated in the same way as their earlier counterparts.

These factors have meant that the use of hand axesas the definitional characteristic of the Acheulean hasbecome problematic. In addition, few other featuresof equal clarity have been offered to redefine theAcheulean. In fact, in many circles, the use of the term“Acheulean” has been eliminated in favor of moregeneral terminology more closely tied to chronology,rather than stone tool typology. Advances in datingtechniques and new conceptual approaches to thearchaeology of stone tools have presented a substan-tial critique of the Acheulean culture as a singularphenomenon. It now appears that the Acheulean wasneither a group of related hominids nor a single “cul-tural” way of manufacturing stone tools. The termnow has little agreed-upon significance beyond itsmeaning for chronology.

— Grant S. McCall

See also Axes, Hand; Dating Techniques; OldowanCulture; Paleontology

Further Readings

Deacon, H. J., & Deacon, J. (1999). Human beginningsin South Africa: Uncovering the secrets of the StoneAge. Cape Town, South Africa: David Philip.

Klein, R. G. (1999). The human career: Humanbiological and cultural origins. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ACROPOLIS6

Leakey, M. D. (1971). Olduvai Gorge: Excavations inBed I and II, 1960–1963. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Sampson, C. G. (1974). The Stone Age archaeology ofsouthern Africa. New York: Academic Press.

Schick, K. D., & Toth, N. (1993). Making silent stonesspeak: Human evolution and the dawn oftechnology. New York: Simon & Schuster.

4 ACROPOLIS

The word acropolis literally means the higher, fortifiedpart of a city. While there may be many of these inGreece, when we speak of the Acropolis, most under-stand the reference to be to the Acropolis of Athens.The Acropolis sits more than 500 feet above the plainof Attica in the city of Athens, bordered on three sidesby cliffs and accessible by foot on only one side. Itsgeography made it a natural fortress during the iron-age beginnings of Athens, and it functioned primarilyas a fort until sometime after the end of the PersianWars (479 BC).

Evidence of human habitation dates from theNeolithic. Through the centuries, the Acropolis hasserved the people of Athens as a place of residence,palaces, centers of worship, a citadel, and monumentsto their gods and goddesses. One such temple was

dedicated to Athena, the city’s patron goddess, asearly as 650 BC.

Major Monuments

On the Acropolis, major monuments include theParthenon, the Erechtheion, the Temple of AthenaNike, and the Propylaea.

The Parthenon

Built around 440 BC and dedicated to the city’spatron goddess Athena Parthenos, the Parthenon’screators were Pericles, the Athenian sculptor Pheidias,and architects Kallikrates and Iktinos. The cella orcenter of the temple was designed to shelter Pheidias’sstatue of Athena. On four sides of the Parthenon, afrieze of the Procession of the Panathenaea, one ofancient Athens’s most holy religious festivals, depictsthe figures of more than 300 human beings as well asgods and beasts in procession.

Through the centuries following its construction,the Parthenon has served as a Byzantine church, a Latinchurch, and a Muslim mosque. When the Venetiansattacked the Acropolis in 1687, the Turks used theParthenon to store gun powder during the seige. Asthe Venetians bombed the Acropolis, one of the bombshit the Parthenon, destroying much of the structure.

The Erechtheion

Built about 20 years after the Parthenon, theErechtheion sits on a sacred site of the Acropolis, the

Source: © iStockphoto/Andy Didyk.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ACROPOLIS 7

site where Greek legendclaims the goddess Athenaand the god Poseidon-Erechtheus battled overwhich would be the patronof the city. Athena won.The Erechtheion’s maintemple was divided so thatAthenians could worshipboth Athena and Poseidon.The monument’s mostfamous feature is theporch of the Caryatids ormaidens, in which statuesof maidens border theporch’s perimeter. One ofthese was removed fromthe Acropolis by Lord Elginand subsequently sold tothe British Museum, where it remains. The othermaidens are now housed in the Acropolis Museum, sothe figures we now see decorating the porch of theErechtheion are only copies of the original statues.

The Temple of Athena Nike

About the same time as the building of theErechtheion, the architect Kallikrates constructed theTemple of Athena Nike. The small monument’s wallsare friezes depicting the meeting of the gods on oneside and battle scenes on the three remaining sides. In1686, the Turks dismantled the temple to use the sitefor a large cannon. The Greeks rebuilt the templearound 1840 and again in 1936, when the platform onwhich it had been built was found to be crumbling.

The Propylaea

Pheidias’s associate, the architect Mnesicles, builtthe Propylaea, a monumental gateway entrance tothe Acropolis just before the beginning of thePeloponnesian wars. It consisted of a central structureand two wings, with one wing serving as an art gallery.The Propylaea’s massive colonnades faced the east andwest, and two rows of columns divided the central cor-ridor. Its coffered ceiling was complete with painteddecoration.

The Acropolis Today

Earthquakes, fires, bombs, vandalism, and warhave, through the centuries, taken their toll on the

structures of the Acropolis. In some instances, partsof buildings were demolished and used in theconstruction of new monuments. But once theGreeks liberated Athens from the Turks, they beganmajor restoration efforts to protect, conserve, andrestore the Acropolis.

These efforts continue today. The Greek governmentreports completed restoration of the Erechtheion, partsof the Propylaea, and the east facade of the Parthenon.Projects in progress include the north side of theParthenon, the Propylaea’s central building, and theTemple of Athena Nike.

— C. A. Hoffman

Further Readings

Acropolis Restoration Project, Government ofGreece website: http://ysma.culture.gr/english/index.html

Bruno, V. J. (1996). The Parthenon: Illustrations,introductory essay, history, archeological analysis,criticism (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.

Cosmopoulos, M. B. (Ed.). (2004). The Parthenon andits sculptures. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Hellenic Ministry of Culture website:http://www.culture.gr/

Hurwit, J. M. (2004). The Acropolis in the age ofPericles. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ACTION ANTHROPOLO GY8

4 ACTION ANTHROPOLOGY

Action anthropology is a scholarly enterprise based infield research, data collection, and theory building,during which the anthropologist is also committedto assisting local communities in achieving their goalsand meeting specific felt needs. Rather than pursuingpure science or perusing their own agendas, actionanthropologists see themselves more as tentativecoexplorers who help the host community to identifychallenges and seek ways to meet them. In theprocess, action anthropologists contribute to thecommunity while learning from their experiences.While applied anthropology generally focuses on pro-grammatic concerns of nonlocal funders, both publicand private, action anthropology discovers local con-cerns in the course of ethnographic work and engageslocal resources in addressing them. Though related toapplied anthropology, which began in Great Britainin the 1920s and the United States in the 1930s andwhich shares the goal of being a useful rather thanpurely scholarly field, action anthropology takes amore populist approach. The anthropologist must becommitted to assisting the host community by serv-ing as an educator and a resource, not as a source ofmoney or expertise. Mutually agreed-upon plans foraction arise from knowledge gained by fieldwork andthe reception of knowledge by the host group.

Primarily derived from research with NativeAmerican communities, action anthropology was aproduct of and sustained by the personal dynamismof anthropologist Sol Tax (1907–1995). Anthropologyhas, from its inception, been more than disinterestedresearch and data collection. E. B. Tylor (1832–1917)described anthropology as a reformer’s science.Lewis Henry Morgan (1818–1881) advocated againstIroquois removal. Bronislaw Malinowski (1884–1942)publicly excoriated British colonial policy, and JamesMooney of the Bureau of American Ethnology cri-tiqued the federal government as part of the cause ofPlains Indians’ social and economic problems in the1880s. Nevertheless, it was many decades beforeanthropologists came to the idea that host individualsin the field were colleagues rather than “informants”or to the belief that the relationship between field-worker and host community was one of mutualhelp and reciprocity rather than simply scholar andsubject population. Also, action anthropologists areparticipants as well as participant observers, both

objectively learning from outside and eventuallyentering the fray when and where appropriate.Though not without good intentions, early anthropol-ogy simply suggested solutions for Native peoples,anathema to action anthropologists. Action anthropol-ogy facilitates what is now referred to as community-based needs assessment.

Tax articulated his own understanding of actionanthropology in 1975. He stressed professional toler-ance for ambiguity in action anthropology, as itsmethodology was tentative and contextual, much likethe clinical situation of a physician interacting with apatient. He cautioned that this process was not socialwork; theory building and understanding remainedparamount but should never be separated fromassisting communities with their specific difficulties.Local people must make their own decisions andidentify their own problems and target the specificsituations they wish to address. Tax stressed three val-ues in carrying out action anthropology: the value oftruth couched in science and scholarship, the valueof freedom of communities to make their own deci-sions, and the value of focusing on only the specifictask at hand rather than attempting to change totalsituations.

Tax worked out the program for action anthropol-ogy while teaching at the University of Chicago anddirecting the work of graduate students at a fieldschool, which ran from 1948 to 1959. Tax himselfworked for a short period of time in 1928 amongthe Fox (Mesquakie) of Tama, Iowa, and steered hisstudents into the Fox Project, where they engagedin cooperative activities such as establishing anAmerican Legion hall, educating the local non-Indianpopulation about the Mesquakie and the Mesquakieabout their neighbors, setting up an artists’ coopera-tive, assisting the Mesquakie in maintaining theintegrity of their own local school system, encourag-ing small-scale communal gardening, establishingscholarships for Native students, and opening theirown off-reservation residence as an informal socialhall for young people to form strong relationshipswith members of the Native community.

Tax’s own larger anthropological career demon-strated his commitment to the ideals that find theirexpression in action anthropology, particularly hisorganizing the Chicago American Indian Conferencein 1961, his activism regarding Native Americanrights, and his founding of the international journalCurrent Anthropology, which published new research

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ACTION ANTHROPOLO GY 9

and facilitated collegial dialogue, academic and Native.In addition to his research and political action inGuatemala, Dr. Tax worked for the improvement ofhis own Hyde Park neighborhood; participated in theorganization and early growth of the AmericanIndian Center of Chicago; supported a Native-basededucational venture, Native American EducationalServices (NAES) College in Chicago; encouragedNative American participation in the Master of ArtsProgram in the Social Sciences (MAPSS) at theUniversity of Chicago, the Chicago Indian Center;and facilitated the establishment of the tribal researchD’Arcy McNickle Center at the Newberry Library,named after his friend, colleague, and key AmericanIndian Chicago Conference associate D’Arcy McNickle(of the Salish culture).

Many scholars have carried on the mission ofaction anthropology using Tax’s insights and continueto do so. Among the most significant action anthro-pologists to emerge directly under Sol Tax’s mentor-ship were Robert Reitz, Robert K. Thomas, and NancyLurie. Robert Reitz started with the Fox Project in 1955and began an artists’ cooperative. He also workedamong the Three Confederated Tribes (Mandan,Hidatsa, and Arikara) at Fort Berthold and was direc-tor of the Indian Center of Chicago until his death in1971. Unfortunately, his legacy was in action and notin writing, and thus we have little from his pen.Robert Thomas, a Cherokee anthropologist trainedat Chicago, worked on the Fox Project, the NationalIndian Youth Council, was a founding board memberof NAES, and was deeply involved in the struggle forNative American rights. Nancy Lurie of the Milwaukeepublic museum also based her approach to museumanthropology in the realm of action anthropology,stressing Native community involvement and part-nership with the Native community in constructingmuseum displays and establishing activities andprograms. She also promoted displays of contempo-rary Native life rather than simply focusing on theNative past.

Other anthropologists credited with direct assis-tance to indigenous populations that presage the ten-ants of action anthropology include Allan Holmber’swork in Vico, Peru, assisting in the aftermath of anearthquake, and James Spillius’s intervention inTikopia (Polynesia), after a horrific hurricane. Bothanthropologists’ roles moved from pure research towhat Tax would call “action”: communal assistance atthe time of a crisis.

The invisibility of Tax’s own action program aswell as that of others became painfully evident whenVine Deloria Jr. and other Native Americans tookanthropology to task for remaining apart from thereal needs of Native communities, exploiting themthrough research that furthered only the careerof the anthropologist. Deloria, who attended theAmerican Indian Chicago Conference in 1961, pub-lished his initial critique in 1969, some 20 years afterthe inception of the Fox Project and at a time whenresearch with Native American communities hadsignificantly diminished. Nevertheless, his wordsserved to challenge the discipline to take seriously itscommitment to peoples as much as to research andto carry out research not “pure” but practical to livedsituations.

Deloria’s critique was part of a larger change inconsciousness experienced among U.S. anthropolo-gists who experienced not only paradigmatic melt-down but also a crisis of conscience in the 1970s.Many came to believe that their discipline was tooclosely associated with the rise of colonialism at best,and instrumental or essential to colonialism’s successat worst. Anthropology as a field grew self-consciousand self-critical, attempted to distance itself frompower structures (although the academy itself is apower structure), and sought consciously and evenradically to identify and side with indigenous peopleswho were once objects of study.

While action anthropology was being formulatedboth in the mind and heart of Sol Tax and in thepraxis of the Fox Project, a similar community orga-nizing was beginning in urban Chicago. Fostered bysuch activists as Sol Alinsky, who knew Tax well, thismovement sought to improve the lives of the urbanpoor, particularly industrial and meatpacking work-ers. Tax’s work in the Chicago Community Trustmirrored these concerns.

There is no formal “school” of action anthropologytoday, nor does it have specific institutional locus.Lecture, meetings, and concrete field model its meth-ods and practices. Tax and his students Fred Gearingand Robert Rietz presented their work on the FoxProject at the Central States Anthropological Societyin the spring of 1956. Information on the Fox Projectand action anthropology was also presented at a sym-posium at the annual meeting of the AmericanAnthropological Association in 1957. There havebeen significant conferences on action anthropologyitself, including the Panajachel Symposium, held

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ACTION ANTHROPOLO GY10

in Guatemala in November 1974. The majority ofcontemporary reflections on action anthropologyare intimately linked to the career of Sol Tax and theFox Project.

Action anthropology is not without its critics.Most trenchant of the critiques is precisely thatanthropology should be conducted as an objectivescience whose goals are research, publication, andinstruction. To become aligned with people in thefield is to betray that objectivity. Furthermore, criticspoint out, the more students became aligned withthe helping aspect of action anthropology, the lesslikely they were to complete their doctorates, andtherefore, they ultimately could do little to interactwith and help change larger power structures. Whilethese criticisms are fair, action anthropologists areinclined to empower others to construct solutionsrather than to deal with these power structures them-selves. Action anthropology is sometimes accused ofa hidden paternalism in the assumption that a groupneeds to change or that outsiders are necessary toeffect successful or appropriate change.

Finally, there are critics who say that Americananthropological theory was insufficient to the goals ofaction anthropology and action anthropology wouldhave been better served through British applied socialanthropology and a multiplicity of social scienceapproaches. Because the methods of action anthro-pology are an outcome of Sol Tax’s particular way ofproceeding in the field, it may have been too depen-dent on his own personality and action anthropologyis still finding its tentative, experimental way withinthe discipline. Many anthropologists adhere to theideals of service to the host group, theory buildingthrough social interaction and process, and the trans-formation of anthropology from ivory-tower scienceto collaborative venture.

Sol Tax’s ideals are manifest in today’s “servicelearning courses,” in which elements of actionanthropology are found, as well as in applied anthro-pology and hyphenated disciplines such as medical-anthropology and legal-anthropology. With thegrowth of service learning and values-centered edu-cation, there will continue to be a place for actionanthropology. Action anthropology turned fieldworkinto a lifelong profession and activity, not just some-thing required in graduate school and contemplatedfor the rest of one’s career. The fundamental notionsof action anthropology are widespread today, espe-cially as anthropologists and “Natives” around the

world continue to build collaborative relationships.The present generation of anthropologists, especiallythose who work with Native Americans, has practi-tioners who consciously identify themselves as actionanthropologists and shape their fieldwork and teach-ing accordingly.

The tension between publishing within theacademy versus development of ongoing reciprocalrelationships with one’s field is the tension betweendoing and being, and that tension can be productive.Action anthropology has more often than notrevealed the difficulty of change rather than theimportance of total transformation. Indeed, invalue-oriented anthropology, the deepest relation-ships are not utilitarian, but simply are. Perhaps thatis the more important legacy of action anthropology:fieldworkers learn this lesson through interactionand actively establish these relations, rather thansimply gathering knowledge or applying templatesfor local change.

In my own first year at graduate school in Chicago,Sol Tax told me that ultimately anthropology is anacademic discipline that is relegated to the bastions ofoffices with securely closed doors, libraries, and class-rooms. After he said this, he looked up at me and said,with a twinkle in his eye, “But I hope you will proveme wrong on this.”

When Creighton University sought to increaseenrollment and improve retention of Native students,it was an anthropologist instructor (me) and a NativeAmerican colleague working in retention who togetherrecognized the need to increase the layers of supportgiven to each high school student. They required helpfilling out both admissions and scholarship applica-tions, and the faculty needed help to better understandthe cultural situation of an increasing population ofreservation and urban Native individuals on campus.Our work, funded only with gas money and roomand board, was in the best tradition of Tax’s actionanthropology. We shared the recognition with com-munities on a local reservation of an addressableproblem, the expenditure of a few tanks of gas, andmutually discovered solutions as we worked towarddirect assistance to students, to evaluate our successesand failures, and to build better relations with Nativestudents and their relatives.

The best explications of action anthropology comefrom Sol Tax’s own pen. Keep in mind that Tax’sview was constantly being modified both in particularfield contexts as well as in intellectual discourse.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ADAPTATION, BIOLO GICAL 11

While Sol Tax himself attributed the Fox Project asthe birthplace of action anthropology, this programis best understood in the context of Tax’s entire lifeas demonstrated by Blanchard. Fred Gearing, RobertMcC. Netting, and Lisa R. Peattie assembled a docu-mentary history of the Fox Project, which exposes alot of the thought processes involved in formulatingaction plans and was used for some time as a textbookfor Tax’s seminars on action anthropology. FrederickGearing also wrote a more analytical text on his workin the Fox Project. Assessments of action anthropol-ogy and the Fox Project have originated from a vari-ety of authors, such as Piddington, Stucki, Washburn,Rubenstein, Foley, Bennett, Daubenmeier, and Mertens.While there are many critiques of anthropology byNative people, the most trenchant remains that ofVine Deloria Jr.

— Raymond A. Bucko

Further Readings

Bennett, J. W. (1998). Applied and actionanthropology: Ideological and conceptualaspects with a supplement: The career of SolTax and the genesis of action anthropology.In J. W. Bennett, L. A. Despres, & M. Nagai(Eds.), Classic anthropology: Critical essays,1944–1996 (pp. 315–358). New Brunswick, NJ:Transaction.

Daubenmier, J. M. (2003). The Meskwaki and Sol Tax:Reconsidering the actors in action anthropology(Iowa). Dissertation Abstracts International64(06A), 394.

Deloria, V. Jr. (1969). Custer died for your sins:An Indian manifesto. New York: Macmillan.

Foley, D. E. (1991). The Fox Project: A reappraisal.Current Anthropology, 40, 171–191.

Gearing, F. O. (1970). The face of the Fox. Chicago:Aldine.

Mertens, R. (2004). Where the action was. Universityof Chicago Magazine 96(4), 30–35.

Piddington, R. O. (1960). Action anthropology.Wellington, New Zealand: Polynesian Society.

Tax, S. (1975). Action anthropology. CurrentAnthropology, 16, 514–517.

Washburn, W. (1984). Ethical perspectives in NorthAmerican ethnology. In J. Helm (Ed.), Socialcontexts of American ethnology: Proceedings of theAmerican Ethnological Society (pp. 50–64).Washington, DC: American AnthropologicalAssociation.

4 ADAPTATION, BIOLOGICAL

Adaptation has a diversity of meanings, even withinareas in which it is widely used, such as anthropology,biology, the humanities, and in common parlance.

The study of adaptations is a central activity inbiology, where interpretations of the concept havereceived much scrutiny in recent years, for example,in the articles and monographs of Andrews, Brandon,Gould and Lewontin, Gould and Vrba, Rose andLauder, Sober, and Williams. Gould and Verba pointedout the presence of two distinct adaptation conceptsin the literature: one historical, emphasizing traits’origins and their past histories of selection, the othernonhistorical, emphasizing current functions of traitsand their contributions to fitness. For example, someargue that to be regarded as an adaptation, a traitmust have been produced by natural selection, and somust be genetically inherited. Gould and Lewontindistinguished adaptations from exaptions. The latterare preexisting traits that at some time in the pastacquired beneficial effects without being selected forthem at that time. However, exaptions may subse-quently be modified by natural selection as a result oftheir new functions. The concept of exaptions seemsto have little relevance to studies of extant species.

A meaning common in physiology and the socialsciences is that an adaptation is a beneficial modifica-tion of an organism that adjusts it to changes in theenvironment. In many cases, these changes are home-ostatic. For example, changes in the size of the pupilkeep the light intensity at the retina within the opti-mal range for vision. If effects of such phenotypicadjustments lead to increased survival and reproduc-tive success, that is, to greater fitness, they and themachinery of the body (nerves, muscles, and so on)that produce them are adaptations in the core sensedescribed below.

Another common requirement for a trait to be con-sidered adaptive is that its functional consequencesmust be consistent with a priori design specificationsfor accomplishing a specified task. For example, inorder to transport oxygen from the lungs to the rest ofthe body, blood must include a component that bindsto oxygen in the lungs yet subsequently releases it intissues that are oxygen depleted. Hemoglobin hasexactly this property, as revealed by its oxygen dissoci-ation curve. Optimality models used in behavioralecology and many other areas of functional biology

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ADAPTATION, BIOLO GICAL12

are comparable to the engineering specifications usedin functional anatomy. Both attempt to identify char-acteristics of functional designs for specific tasks.At the heart of the use of design specifications is thequestion: Under existing circumstances, how would awell-adapted organism of this species behave or bestructured? Design specifications play an importantrole in the study of adaptations, at every level of bio-logical organization.

At the core of these diverse interpretations is theidea that adaptations are traits that benefit the organ-ism. In many cases, these benefits result from effectson vital processes, such as maintaining osmotic balance,obtaining food, avoiding predators, caring for off-spring, and so forth. The ultimate criterion of benefitis that a trait’s effects must be functional, in the senseof enhancing fitness. In some cases, adaptation refersto the processes that select for such traits. Adaptationsmay be at any level of organization: biochemical,physiological, anatomical, or behavioral.

Measuring Adaptiveness in Extant Species

From the standpoint of the current functions of traitsand their impact on fitness, a trait variant is betteradapted, relative to competing variants in other indi-viduals of the same species, to the extent that itdirectly augments fitness. Thus, in studies of livingorganisms, one can confirm that a trait is adaptiveand measure its degree of adaptiveness by determin-ing its effect on fitness. However, just confirming thattraits are adaptive leaves unanswered some of themost interesting questions about a trait, such as:What correlated traits augment fitness because theyaffect the same vital functions, and what are their rel-ative contributions? By what means does a trait aug-ment fitness, and how strongly is it being selected?Adaptation requires a mechanism.

Following is an abbreviated description of severalresearch approaches that, depending on one’s choiceamong them, can answer the questions above, provid-ing quantitative measures of the relative adaptivenessof traits in terms of their contributions to functions aswell as fitness. They enable one to evaluate the directforce of characters on fitness, excluding effects fromcorrelated traits. They are based on phenotypic selec-tion but not the genetic response to selection; thus,they require only data that can be obtained within asingle generation and require no assumptions aboutthe genetic basis or evolutionary history of the traits.

They take advantage of individual differences in traitsin a local population of a species and are applicable topolygenic traits, such as those commonly studied byanthropologists, evolutionary psychologists, and biol-ogists. Some are based on a priori design specificationsof optimal phenotypes, others on multivariate selec-tion theory, especially the work of Russell Lande andStevan Arnold, which deals with the effects of selec-tion acting simultaneously on multiple characters.

Components

Depending on the choice of approach, variouscombinations of the following four empirical compo-nents are used: (a) samples, taken in a local populationof a species, of individual variants in a set of pheno-typic traits known or thought to affect a specifiedvital activity, such as getting food or obtaining mates;(b) samples of proximate effects (“performances”) ofthese variants, whether functional or otherwise; (c) aquantitative optimality model of one or a combina-tion of traits and corresponding proximate effectsthat are posited to augment biological fitness; and(d) estimates of lifetime fitness of each individual.

The approaches will be illustrated by a fictitiousstudy of fishing success of women in a local popula-tion. They spearfish independently in the nearbylakes. The fish that a woman catches are eaten onlyby her family and are the primary staple of their diet.The only exceptions are fish exchanged in barter forother goods. Three traits of the women affect theirrelative fishing styles and are measured. Women withthe best visual acuity favor lake edge shallows, whereonly they can see the small fish hiding among thewater plants. Only the tallest women fish regularlyin deep water, where fish are largest, oldest, and rela-tively slow moving, but scarce. Women with the great-est competence with a spear tend to fish in water ofintermediate depth, where they have a unique abilityto catch the fast-moving, mature fish.

Two aspects of the women’s daily catch seem to beof particular importance: their success at catchingpescos, a rare and highly prized fish, very valuable inbarter, and the total mass of other fish that they catch.Each day, the weight of pescos caught by each femaleand the weight of the rest of her catch are recorded.Seasonal totals of these two sets of values for eachfemale provide two measures of her fishing success.

First approach: Evaluate the causal link from anyselected trait to fitness. To measure the potential

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM


impact on relative fitness of each phenotypic trait,regress relative fitness w on it. However, because fitness-affecting traits may be correlated, use partial regres-sion ßwz–i (ordinary, not standardized) to measure thedirect impact of the ith trait, zi, on relative fitness w,with indirect effects from correlated traits thus heldconstant. Repeat for each of the other traits that mayaffect relative fitness. Then, to document any correla-tions among these traits, calculate their covariances(unstandardized correlations).

Relative fitness w of an individual is defined withrespect to the mean fitness in the population, w =W/W¯, where W is the absolute fitness of an individ-ual and W¯ is the mean fitness in the population. Thefitness of individuals can be estimated in several ways,particularly by using aspects of reproductive success,such as the number of surviving offspring. Individualfitness can be measured at long-term study sites ofpopulations on which basic demographic data areconsistently recorded and maintained; for data sets ofshorter duration, it can be estimated from variouscomponents of fitness.

The partial regression of relative fitness on a givencharacter is its selection gradient. It measures thechange in relative fitness expected if that characterwere changed by a unit amount but none of the othercharacters varied. A remarkable result, due to RussellLande, is that for a set of characters that affect fitness,including all phenotypically correlated traits thatdirectly affect fitness, their selection gradients,arranged as a vector, include all the information aboutphenotypic selection (but not inheritance) that isneeded to predict the directional response to selection.

So, in the case of our study of fisherwomen, wewould regress their relative fitness on their ability tosee fish hiding in the shallows, on their deep-waterfishing ability, and on their spearing competence,then calculate the three covariances among thesethree traits.

Second approach: Evaluate the causal link from eachtrait to its proximate effects, then the link from eachproximate effect to fitness. The first approach, above,evaluates the causal links from traits to fitness bydetermining their selection gradients. However, thatapproach does not tell us anything about the interven-ing functional effects of traits that augment fitness. In1983, Stevan Arnold used Sewall Wright’s method ofpath analysis to provide a convenient means of parti-tioning selection gradients (see Figure 1). He showed

that for any character zi (such as z1 in Figure 1) thataffects only one performance variable fi, a selectiongradient ßwz–i can be partitioned into two parts: a per-formance gradient ßf–iz–i, representing the effect of thetrait on some aspect of performance, and a fitness gra-dient ßwf–i, representing the effect of performance offitness. That is,

ßwz–i = ßf–iz–i + ßwf–i,

selection = performance + ?fitness

gradient? gradient gradient

where ßwf–i is the partial regression of relative fitness won the performance variable and ßf–iz–i is the partialregression of the performance variable on its traitvariable.

A trait may affect more than one performance vari-able, resulting in branching paths. For example, thesecond trait z2 in Figure 1 affects two performance vari-ables, f1 and f2. In that case, the total path connecting

Source: © iStockphoto/Paul Piebinga.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM


character z2 with relative fitness is the sum of the twopaths, one through effect variable f1 and one througheffect variable f2, as shown in Figure 1. The corre-sponding relationship in partial regression coeffi-cients is ßwz–2 = ßf–1z–2 ßwf–1 + ßf–2z–2 ßwf–2. Thus, thetotal selection gradient can be partitioned into parts,corresponding to branching paths of influence onfitness, as well as factored along paths. These elemen-tary results can be expanded for analysis of selectiongradients in situations considerably more compli-cated than that of the fictitious fisherwomen depictedin Figure 1.

Of course, we want to know the magnitude of theinfluence of various traits on a given proximate effect,not just whether they can have any influence. For thispurpose, we use each trait’s performance gradient to

calculate that trait’s average contribution to the meanvalue of a given effect.

To illustrate, consider our example of spearfishingwomen. The yield of pesco fish of the average womancan be expressed as the sum of mean contributionsfrom each trait that affects these yields: Each suchcontribution is the product of that trait’s averagevalue and its performance gradient for pesco yield:

f¯ = average woman’s pesco yield= ßf–1z–1 · z¯1 = average contribution of visual

acuity+ ßf–1z–2 · z¯2 = average contribution of height

+ ßf–1z–3 · z¯3 = average contribution of spearingability

+ . . . = contribution from other elements.

Traits Performance Fitness

spearskil

non-pescoyield

pescoyield

height

visualacuity

P13

P23

P12

β f 1z 2

z1

f1

f2

z2

z3

w–

βf1z1

βf2z2

β f 2z 3

βwf1

βwf 2

β f 1z 3

Figure 1 Effects of each phenotypic trait (z terms), such as visual acuity, height, and spear skill in fisherwomen, on performance

(f terms), such as yields of pesco and non-pesco fish, and then the effects of performance variables on biological fitness (w term). P terms

on double-headed arrows represent covariances among traits, and ß terms represent partial correlations, as described in text.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM


We can proceed similarly for the second causallink, evaluating the contribution made by each per-formance variable to fitness. For example, the meanfitness w¯ of the spearfishers can be partitioned intoadditive components:

w¯ = ßwf–1 · f¯1 + ßwf–2 · f¯2 + contributionfrom other elements,

where the first two terms in the summation on theright are the contributions to mean fitness made bythe average woman’s catch of pesco and non-pescofish, respectively. Such contributions of performancevariables to fitness are good indicators of their rela-tive adaptiveness.

Third approach: For a selected vital task, devise and testan optimality model. Such a model would be based onoptimizing (maximizing or minimizing, as appropri-ate) a performance variable presumed to have a majornet impact on fitness, taking into account the vari-able’s benefits and also correlated costs and entailedconstraints.

The benefit variable to be optimized is representedby an objective function. If the detrimental effects ofsome cost variables change continually as the benefitvariable changes, the cost and benefit variables can becombined into a single cost-benefit function, to beoptimized. For cost variables that exhibit their detri-mental effects only when they exceed a thresholdvalue, those values are each represented by an appro-priate constraint function. Those diets that meet allconstraints are adequate: They meet minimumrequirements for all nutrients without exceeding anylimits on toxins or other hazards.

For our hypothetical fisherwomen, their fishingis a contribution to the vital task of getting enoughfood and the right kinds. Suppose that during aperiod when catches are poor, their protein intakesand those of their families are so low that increasesin protein intakes are expected to result in greaterincreases in survival and reproductive success thanwould a change in any other attribute of their diets.Then, their objective would be to increase their pro-tein intake, which for them comes almost entirelyfrom fish.

In a protein maximization model for their fishing,this objective is made explicit by an objective function.Suppose that pesco fish are 17% protein and all otherfish are 12% protein. Then, the weight of protein P in

a woman’s catch on a given day can be calculated fromthe linear function P = 0.17f 1 + 0.12f 2, where f 1 is theweight of her pesco catch that day and f 2 is the weightthat day of her catch of other fish. In a simple model,the objective could be to maximize P. Suppose, how-ever, that greater time devoted to fishing results inprogressively less time available for other vital activi-ties, and thus in decrements in fitness. In that case, theobjective function would be for a net effect, chosen toreflect this cost-benefit trade-off.

A variety of constraints would further limit awoman’s ability to obtain more protein. She cannotmaximize protein by limiting her catch to the pro-tein-rich pescos, because they are rarely caught.Other constraints that might restrict her proteinyield include maximum effort that she can devote tofishing and the need to remain below her maxima forall toxins or other hazards entailed by consuming anygiven diet. For example, if pesco fish are unusuallyrich in vitamin D, the upper limit on safe vitamin Dintake establishes a maximum daily safe consump-tion of pesco, even though they are very rich inprotein. If the largest non-pesco fish occur only inthe cold, deep water, the dangers of hypothermia anddrowning might place an upper limit on the timethat can safely be devoted to those fish. The successof an optimality model depends on one’s ability toincorporate as much relevant natural history as pos-sible into the choice of the objective function and itsconstraints.

In addition to the optimality model itself, threeforms of data are required for this approach. They arethe same as in the second approach, namely, (a) indi-vidual values of phenotypic traits that are relevant tothe model (in our example, values for the three traitsthat contribute to successful fishing and for eachconstraint-related trait); (b) proximate effects (theweight of each female’s pesco and non-pesco catchand their respective protein concentrations); and(c) fitness (how long each subject survived and herlifetime reproductive success).

A model is basically an elaborate hypothesis, forwhich the common method of confirmation is agoodness-of-fit test. For an optimality model, sucha test would tell us whether the individuals ortheir mean were at or near the specified optimum.However, for a host of reasons, reviewed by Altmann,Dawkins, Rose and Lauder, and also Emlen, mostorganisms are unlikely to be performing at or nearoptimum. For example, the constraint set may not

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM


be complete, and so the putative optimum may bebeyond reach. A more reasonable question to ask iswhether those individuals that are closer to theoptimum specified by the model have higher fitness,as in Altmann’s study of foraging in yearling baboons(see Figure 2).

Confirming an optimality model in this way is, atthe same time, a confirmation of adaptive differencesin the specified traits and in our identification ofthe functional mechanisms by which these traitsaffect fitness.

Thus, if, up to a point, women whose catchesyielded more protein have higher fitness than otherwomen—if the objective function of the model is,as had been assumed, a limiting factor for fitness—her fishing and the constellation of traits involvedin it are more adaptive than those of the otherwomen.

Fourth approach: Evaluatethe causal links from eachtrait to its proximateeffects. What can we do toevaluate adaptiveness ifdata on fitness are not(yet) available? Method 2was based on Arnold’sseparation of fitness intotwo parts: a performancegradient representing theeffect of the trait on someaspect of performanceand a fitness gradientrepresenting the effect ofperformance on fitness.We can take advantage ofthe ability of performancegradients to isolate theeffect that each trait hason a given performancefrom effects of correlatedtraits, and we can quanti-tatively evaluate the con-tribution made by eachtrait to each performancevariable. If we assumethat through their impacton vital processes, each ofthese performance vari-ables affects fitness, theyare indicative of the adap-

tiveness of the traits, even though in the absenceof fitness data, we would be unable to test thatassumption.

If we had an optimality model (third approach),we would already have hypothesized how to combinetrait variables into quantitative predictions of eachindividual’s level of performance on the most fitness-enhancing performance variable, and thus to predictits fitness.

Recent developments in interspecific comparativemethodology, involving phylogenetic analysis ofhomologous traits, provide another approach to doc-umenting that a trait is an adaptation and studyingthe evolution of correlated traits. For the study ofliving humans, however, the lack of any survivingspecies of the same genus or even family greatly limitsthe applicability of these methods in cultural anthro-pology. Similarly, alteration or removal of traits,

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

−75 −70 −65 −60 −55 −50 −45

Dotty

95 % c.

l.

Eno

Alice Summer

Striper

Energy shortfall (%)

Year

lings

pro

duce

d

Pooh

−40

Figure 2 Reproductive success of female baboons (number of surviving yearlings that they each

produced in their lifetime) as a function of their energy shortfalls as yearlings (percent deviation of

their actual intakes from their respective optimal intakes). Adjusted R2 = 0.76, p = 0.05.

Source: From Altman, S., Foraging for Survival, copyright © 1998, reprinted with permission of The University ofChicago Press.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ADAPTATION, CULTURAL 17

though sometimes used in experimental biology tostudy the functions of traits, would be unacceptablein studies of living humans, except perhaps wheresuch changes are made independently, for cultural ormedical reasons. (Do I chew differently without mythird molars?)

Fifth approach: Evaluate the adaptiveness of a traitby whether its effects are beneficial by intuitively rea-sonable criteria. Suppose that we have neither thedata to evaluate performance gradients or selectiongradients nor a model of optimal phenotype. Whatthen? One possibility is to use our knowledge of thesubjects’ needs or deficiencies, particularly oneshaving major effects on survival or reproduction, andour evaluation of the efficacy of various traits to sat-isfy these needs. This basic technique has enabledmedical research to uncover hundreds of functionaltraits, without recourse to measures of fitness orheritability.

If members of our local fishers’ families show signsof protein malnutrition, then even before the first ofthem has died from it, we can reasonably assert thatthose fishers who bring home a larger harvest of fishhave adaptive fishing practices. On the other hand, ifthe local human population shows signs of scurvy,then the woman who brings back a bounteous catchof fish only because she fished longer has traits thatare less adaptive than the one who fished just longenough to satisfy her family’s protein requirement,then went off in search of fruit—which, she hasnoticed, alleviates the symptoms of scurvy.

For centuries, descriptive naturalists have identi-fied a wide variety of adaptations. Charles Darwindescribed dozens of them. Although the criteria thatdescriptive naturalists use to identify adaptationsseem never to be made explicit, their descriptionsindicate that they rely on noticing uses to whichphysical traits and behaviors are put, particularlyexaggerated ones, and especially in comparison withcorresponding traits in related species. These meth-ods of observant physicians and naturalists are no lessvalid today, even if they have neither the scope ofsome methods described above nor the ability ofthose methods to systematically disentangle andmeasure complex interrelationships.

— Stuart A. Altmann

See also Selection, Natural

Further Readings

Altmann, A. (1998). Foraging for survival: Yearlingbaboons in Africa. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.

Arnold, S. J. (1983). Morphology, performance, andfitness. American Zoologist, 23, 347–361.

Cronk, L., Chagnon, N., & Irons, W. (Eds.). (2000).Adaptation and human behavior: Ananthropological perspective. New York: Aldine deGruyter.

Hill, K., & Hurtado, A. M. (1996). Ache life history:The ecology and demography of a foraging people.New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Lande, R., & Arnold, S. J. (1983). The measurement ofselection on correlated characters. Evolution 37,1210–1226.

Rose, M. R., & Lauder, G. A. (Eds.). (1996).Adaptation. New York: Academic Press.

Smith, E. A., Mulder, M. B., & Hill, K. (2001).Controversies in the evolutionary social sciences:A guide for the perplexed. Trends in Ecology andEvolution, 16, 128–135.

Sober, E. (1984). The nature of selection. Cambridge:MIT Press.

Williams, G. C. (1966). Adaptation and naturalselection. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University.

4 ADAPTATION, CULTURAL

Cultural adaptation is a relatively new concept usedto define the specific capacity of human beingsand human societies to overcome changes of theirnatural and social environment by modificationsto their culture. The scale of culture changes dependson the extent of habitat changes and could vary fromslight modifications in livelihood systems (productiveand procurement activity, mode of life, dwellings andsettlements characteristics, exchange systems, cloth-ing, and so on) to principal transformation of thewhole cultural system, including its social, ethnic,psychological, and ideological spheres.

History of the Idea

The origin of the concept of cultural adaptationand dissemination in contemporary anthropologicalliterature is connected with the concept of cultural

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ADAPTATION, CULTURAL18

systems that, to a certain extent, fit the living condi-tions of their transmitters. The theoretical back-ground of such an approach was created at the endof the 19th century in the American school of possi-bilism led by Franz Boas. Possibilists regarded natureas a basis from which a great number of differentversions of cultural communities could arise anddevelop. Bronislaw Malinowski, the founder of thefunctional approach to the interpretation of culture,understood culture as the specific answer to the chal-lenges of nature. Representatives of the New Yorkschool of culture studies, led by Ashley Montagu,regarded culture as an adaptive dimension of humansociety.

Western European anthropologists in the 1950sand 1960s—in line with a reconsideration of the fun-damental basis of theoretical reflection in the human-ities—took the next step. Julian Steward put forwardthe idea that we should regard the natural environ-ment as one of many factors of cultural change.About the same time, Leslie White proposed the viewthat human culture was an extrasomatic system ofadaptation with three basic directions: technological,social, and ideological.

With this theoretical background, a social direc-tion was formed for investigations in the fields of

cultural and social anthro-pology, cultural geogra-phy, ecology, psychology,and archaeology. Its pro-ponents see their primarytask as the detection ofthe ecological function ofculture. In the mid-1990s,we could distinguish twobasic approaches withinthis framework: the phe-nomenological approach,which paid special atten-tion to the active characterof primitive populations’engagement with theirenvironments, and thecognitive approach, whichtried to classify mentalrepresentations of theenvironment. As a result,western European andAmerican science nowthinks of cultural systems

and societies as autonomous but mutually interde-pendent units in which complicated mechanismsof adaptation to living conditions are elaboratedand realized. In this process, cultural systems act asdeterminants of social trajectory, and society is anindispensable component of this trajectory.

In Marxist Soviet and post-Soviet science, theanalysis of natural geographic factors in the genesisof culture and detection of culture’s ecological func-tion is connected with the ethnographic directionof interpreting culture from an actional approach. Themovement’s most prominent founder and promoter,E. Markaryan, regarded culture as a system of extrabio-logical mechanisms, through which the whole cycle ofhuman activity is realized, primarily in all of its specificmanifestations: stimulation, programming, regulation,fulfillment, maintenance, and reproduction. The adap-tive effect here could be achieved as a result of the plu-rality of a culture system’s potentialities. At the sametime, the majority of actionalism’s proponents don’tdeny that the specific mode of adaptation to livingconditions is elaborated in human society. There, thecultural system no longer acts as an adaptive unit butonly as a universal mechanism of adaptation.

The concept of the ecological function of culturehas been further developed in recent studies by

Source: © Photo provided by www.downtheroad.org, The Ongoing Global Bicycle Adventure.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AESTHETIC APPRECIATION 19

Russian ethnologist Sergei Arutyunov. According toArutyunov, we should regard culture as a set of dif-ferent ways of institutionalizing human activity.Culture’s principal functions are the formation andtransformation of the environment, on one hand, andof human beings with their spiritual and physicalcharacteristics, on the other. The formation of a cul-tural system is a process of adaptation to specificniches, at first only natural ones, but niches that, inthe course of time, become more social. To be able torealize its adaptive function, culture should not onlybe capable of responding to a minimum of environ-mental requirements, but also have at its disposalthe potential necessary for the achievement of itsadaptive effect in new conditions.

Main Notions and Theoriesof Cultural Adaptation

In recent decades, the concept of cultural adaptationhas become an integral part of many fields of behav-ioral studies, such as behavioral psychology, behav-ioral archaeology, behavioral anthropology, andothers. Their principal subject of investigation isbehavioral systems, which are regarded as a model ofconnections between human activity and compo-nents of natural environment. In the second half ofthe 1990s, such notions as behavioral selection,behavioral flow, behavioral repertoire and others con-tributed to the rise in popularity of a cultural adapta-tion concept.

Series of theories, notions, and concepts have beenelaborated on in connection with the concept of cul-tural adaptation, among them, adaptive level, adap-tive policies and processes, and accommodation andassimilation. Most are subjects of sharp discussions.At the present, the concept of optimum adaptive levelappears to be the only one that does not invoke sub-stantial opposition. The idea of optimum adaptivelevel is that the human group always tries to minimizethe changes necessary for achieving an adaptiveeffect. We can trace the roots of this idea to physics inthe 18th century. Lagrange formulated for the firsttime the principle of least action. In the first half ofthe 20th century, this theory in different variationswas explored by Losch in economic geography andby Zipf in social sciences. It plays an important rolein systems analysis (as in the concept of minimumpotential energy) and in operational analysis (the

route of optimum transfer or geodesic line). Environ-mental psychologists have also adapted it.

In applying the concept of cultural adaption, thereare several acute problems, including the gradation ofadaptive levels for each adaptive policy. During thepast 40 years, anthropologists have discussed a broadspectrum of variation in parameters. Among them,we can discern criteria that can be defined rather pre-cisely, such as the concrete scoring of the net efficiencyof food acquisition, alongside absolute abstract notions,such as happiness.

— Olena V. Smyntyna

Further Readings

Arutyunov, S. (1993). Adaptivnoie znacheniekulturnogo polimorfizma [Adaptive meaning ofcultural polymorphism]. Etnograficheskoeobozrenie 3, 41–56.

Bell, P. A., Green, T. C., Fisher, J. D., & Baum, A.(1996). Environmental psychology. Orlando, FL:Harcourt Brace.

Cohen, Y. A. (1974). Culture as adaptation. In Y. A.Cohen (Ed.), Man in adaptation: The culturalpresent. Chicago: Aldine.

Ingold, T. (1994). Introduction to culture. In T. Ingold(Ed.), Companion encyclopaedia of anthropology(pp. 329–349). London: Routledge.

Markaryan, E. S. (1975). K ponimaniyu specifikichelovecheskogo obschestva kak adaptivnoi sistemy[To the understanding of specificity of humansociety as adaptive system]. In A. D. Lebedev(Ed), Geograficheskie aspekty ecologii cheloveka[Geographic aspects of human ecology](pp. 139–149). Moscow: Institut geografiiAN SSSR.

Steward, J. H. (1955). Theory of culture change.Urbana, IL: Urbana University Press.

White, L. (1959). The Evolution of culture. New York:McGraw-Hill.

4 AESTHETIC APPRECIATION

Aesthetics is the area of philosophy that studies thenature of beauty and art. Aesthetic appreciation, then,is the admiration of beauty, such as valuing the finearts of music, literature, dance, and visual art. What isconsidered beautiful and even what is considered

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AESTHETIC APPRECIATION20

art are not always agreed upon by everyone in thesame culture, much less across different times.Recognizing what is appreciated aesthetically for agiven group can help us understand the values thatinform their decisions, how individuals interact witheach other, and even how advanced a past civilizationwas according to how art was incorporated into theirtasks. Much of what we know about ancient civiliza-tions in Egypt, Greece, South America, and China, forexample, comes from the art and artifacts that havebeen uncovered by archaeologists. The word aesthet-ics comes from the Greek word aisthanomai, whichmeans to perceive.Theories of aesthetics fall under thestudy of philosophy and other disciplines concernedwith how we value what we perceive.

Artifacts are objects created for human use, such astools, weapons, clothing, utensils, and individualworks of art. The word art usually refers to the inten-tional process of creating something to fulfill an aes-thetic purpose. Because there are choices in howartifacts are designed, they can be artistic and carry an

aesthetic quality. While some people sharereactions to certain objects of art, the aes-thetic properties themselves are usuallysubject to individual interpretation. That apainting is square, framed in gold, andbrushed with blue and yellow pigments areaesthetic facts; they are not questionable.That the square represents perfect order,the gold depicts the prestige of royalty,and the vibrant blue and yellow conveythe peace, warmth, and contentment ofthe sun shining in the sky are aestheticdeterminations that could be interpreteddifferently. They are judgments. Aestheticproperties often have the power to inspireemotional response, and such a response isnot likely to be consistent.

Whether or not there is a universal con-cept of beauty is a question philosophershave asked for centuries. Nevertheless, thebeauty and aesthetic properties found in artserve many purposes. Art can be educa-tional, as with an illustration that details thebones in the human skeleton. It can be rep-resentative, as with a play that tells the lifeof two characters in history. It can motivate,as with a speech that inspires listeners toaction. Art can enrich our lives in the waythat a sculpture adorns a room or music

inspires a mood. The ways we communicate what weperceive in the world are expressed in how we create,value, and respond to the aesthetic properties of art.Contemporary philosophers of aesthetics are con-cerned with our perceptions, both immediate imagesthat present themselves in our minds and the personalmanner in which we make sense of such impressions.Because aesthetic appreciation inspires emotionalresponse, it is also of interest to cognitive psychologistswho seek to know how the brain processes what we see.

Major Contributors

The term aesthetics was first used in 1735 by AlexanderGottlieb Baumgarten, a German philosopher who sep-arated the study of knowledge into two subgroups:logic as the study of abstract ideas and aesthetics as thestudy of how feelings influence sensory perception.The topic itself is much older, having been exploredby ancient Greek philosophers. Plato (427–347 BC)believed that true reality exists in perfect forms of

Source: © iStockphoto/Radu Razvan.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AESTHETIC APPRECIATION 21

concepts like good, beauty,triangle, and so on. Peopleand objects can at best onlybe imitations of the idealforms, because the worldwe live within is made ofappearances. If somethingis beautiful, it is becausewe strive to know the idealform of beauty. In the dia-logue The Republic, Platosuggests that art can bedangerous. Poems and sto-ries can be entertaining andbeautiful, but they are false-hoods because they are onlyrepresentations of true real-ity. Plato saw art as an imita-tion of life and life as animitation of the ideal forms.Aristotle (384–322 BC) simi-larly recognized the imita-tive value of art but more as an instrument forcommunicating with nature. When we appreciatesomething for its aesthetic value, positive emotions arearoused because we step away from our individualselves and recognize the universal beauty we share withall of nature. Aristotle saw poetry and tragedy as ways ofrising above individual emotional situations; aestheticappreciation paves the way for spiritual purification.

Medieval philosophers expanded Aristotle’s reli-gious focus. For Thomas Aquinas (AD 1224–1274),the beauty we witness in the world proves cosmicorder and the power of the divine. Aquinas also iden-tified what he saw as the necessary components ofbeauty: perfection, proportion, and clarity. Theoriesof aesthetics since this time have tried to define art andbeauty. During the 18th-century Age of Enlighten-ment, the emphasis shifted toward shedding supersti-tions and recognizing the human capacity for reason.The Earl of Shaftesbury (1671–1713) looked tohuman nature to explain why we have certain tastes.We identify some objects as aesthetically pleasingbecause they affect our sentiments. Like Shaftesbury,Baumgarten (1714–1762) believed that the emo-tions were not necessarily something that should berepressed. He saw aesthetic experience as a means ofinteracting with the world through our thoughts orcognition, such as poetry and the truth it revealsabout the world.

Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) was concerned lesswith emotions than with separating the world ofappearances from things as they truly exist. For aesthet-ics, this means that unlike Shaftesbury, we admirethings because they are beautiful and not because of thepleasure they produce. Beauty is a universal concept,something that exists independently of our recognitionof it. Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860) and FriedrichNietzsche (1844–1900) both emphasized the role of thehuman will and art as a means of freeing oneself frommisery. Music for Schopenhauer is the purest of the artsbecause of the abstract creative powers it employs. ForNietzsche, two opposing powers are present in both artand the artist: Apollonian (light, beauty, and measure)and Dionysian (chaos). Nietzsche’s “will to power”—inspired by Schopenhauer’s “will to live”–embracespain. Aesthetics here is a natural drive that revealsand transcends the burden of the individual humancondition, uniting all of humanity across cultures.

Art is defined by R. G. Collingwood (1889–1943) asself-expression and by Monroe C. Beardsley (1915–1985)as something produced for the purpose of aestheticpleasure. Unlike an artist, a craftsperson creates arti-facts for the purpose of function. The 20th-century“new criticism” movement saw aesthetic appreciationas having its own value and “good” art as representingthe common human experience through Westernhistory. More recently, Arthur Danto (1924– ) has

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION22

suggested that what is appreciated as art can beinfluenced by the evolving discussion of theoristssuch as himself but nonetheless has specific contentand meaning. Art is much broader for George Dickie(1926– ) and is defined according to the aestheticprinciples that are able to contain the viewer’s aware-ness; Dickie also formulated the “institutional theoryof art” to explain the systematic way of restrictingaesthetic value to what is appreciated within society.

— Elisa Ruhl

Further Readings

Beardsley, Monroe. (1966). Aesthetics from classicalGreece to the present: A short history. New York:Macmillan.

Carroll, Noël (Ed.). (2000). Theories of art today.Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Dickie, George. (1997). Introduction to aesthetics: Ananalytic approach. Oxford, UK: Oxford UniversityPress.

4 AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Just as with many phrases, affirmative action canmean different things to different people. Not onlydo we find a difference in definition, but we find a

difference among people in how they view it. Perhapsan individual’s view of affirmative action is some-times affected by how it personally affects that personor someone close to that person. It is understandablethat if one is personally helped by its presence, aperson might be inclined to be in favor of it. Ofcourse, if one believes that affirmative action shouldbe used because it is better for society to provideopportunities for those who have not had them in thepast, such an individual might also be in favor of it.On the other hand, if one has been personallydeprived of an opportunity because of its implemen-tation, this person may not be in favor of it. In addi-tion, if a person believes affirmative action is notnecessary today in our society, there might be opposi-tion to it. Obviously, there are a host of other reasonsfor being in favor of it or being against it.

Affirmative action makes it possible for a numberof our citizens who have not traditionally beengiven equal opportunities in this country to improvethemselves and make contributions to our society.The policy has not remained the same over time. Itcontinues to change and expand from the 1960s,when it first started to gain public notice. A numberof former presidents and court cases have extendedaffirmative action policies. This is important becauseit recognizes the political implication of the policy.It is also important because government has thepower and influence to bring about substantialchanges in a society. Thus, we can expect affirmative

action to be a topical concernfor our present and futurepolitical leaders. We can alsoexpect various public groupsto lobby for and against theissue. Of course, it will be ofinterest to private individualsand concerns because it willalso affect them in many ways.

There are a variety of reasonswhy affirmative action is pre-sent in our society. Certainly, anumber of pressure groups orinterest groups worked tobring it about. One can alsocite a variety of other reasonsfor its presence. For example,there is ample evidence thatsome populations in oursociety, such as women andSource: © iStockphoto/Lise Gagne.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AFRICA, SO CIALIST SCHO OLS IN 23

minorities, have not been treated fairly or equally intheir aspirations to improve their lives. It is espe-cially important to note this has taken place in theareas of employment and education. Affirmativeaction policies could reduce this inequity of treat-ment. In addition, one could cite a history ofdiscrimination toward certain individuals in oursociety based on race, ethnic origin, and gender.Unfortunately, remnants of this discrimination stillexist in our society. Perhaps they are not as evidentin our public arena today as they were in the past,but they are still manifested in the behavior of somepeople. One should not believe that affirmativeaction will quickly eliminate all inequalities in oursociety, but it is a good start to improving thelives and conditions for many of our citizens whotraditionally have had the doors of opportunityclosed to them.

Of course, affirmative action policies have also beencriticized for a number of reasons. For example, a pop-ular view is that only the most qualified individualshould be given preference in hiring or in acceptancefor admission to a particular program. However, it isa view that does not lack criticism and is not withoutdifficulties, such as determining the meaning of“most qualified.” Others may also believe that affir-mative action is in reality a form of reverse discrimi-nation. They suggest that those who are not chosenwhen qualified are really discriminated againstbecause of their particular characteristics, such asgender and race. Still others may believe that the daysof discrimination have been put aside and that oursociety can operate fairly without an affirmativeaction policy.

Advocates of affirmative action certainly can citegood reasons for its presence in our society. Obviously,it has helped and will help certain individuals obtainopportunities to improve their lives in many ways andalso brings them into positions of influence, prestige,and power in our society. Many of these individualsmay not be able to advance as well without an affir-mative action program. Of course, their representa-tion in desirable public and private areas will have aneffect on the attitudes of our citizens. In particular,their presence should change some views about theirabilities and their roles. For example, law enforce-ment has traditionally been a male-oriented type ofemployment, and it still remains so. However, withthe hiring of more females as police officers, oursociety is learning that females are capable law

enforcement officers. The same may be said for anumber of other professions, such as law and medi-cine, which have traditionally been occupied primar-ily by white males.

No one knows for sure what the future holds foraffirmative action. However, there is no doubt thatour society is becoming more pluralistic. We canexpect to see more calls for an extension of affirma-tive action policies—as well as opposition to thisextension. In any case, we have seen and will continueto see a higher percentage of individuals who havetraditionally not been publicly prominent in oursociety becoming more evident in a wide variety ofpositions. This occurrence will be due to a number ofreasons, and certainly one is affirmative action. It isnot easy to assess the effectiveness of affirmativeaction policies and whether our society is better withtheir enforcement. Again, we may see a differenceof opinion here among our citizens. Thus, the con-troversy regarding affirmative action will probablycontinue in the future.

— William E. Kelly

Further Readings

Bergman, B. (1996). In defense of affirmative action.New York: Basic Books.

Curry, G. E. (Ed.). (1996). The affirmativeaction debate. Cambridge, MA: PerseusBooks.

Eastland, T. (1997). Ending affirmative action:The case of colorblind justice. New York: BasicBooks.

Lynch, F. R. (1991). Invisible victims: White malesand the crisis of affirmative action. New York:Praeger.

4 AFRICA, SOCIALIST SCHOOLS IN

The African concern for the state and society socio-economic and political advancement led to theconsideration of both capitalist and socialist pathsof development, which brought about a wealth ofanthropological studies on precapitalist forms of thesocial organization, colonialist policies innovatingthe society, and the challenges of postindependence

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AFRICA, SO CIALIST SCHO OLS IN24

times to carry out sustainable development by thenew states. African socialist thought incorporatedthe African supernatural values, including Islam orChristianity, into socialist ideas. Nkrumah adoptedboth Marxist socialism and Christianity in Ghanawithout any contradiction between the two. LeopoldSenghor (1960–1980) maintained reconciliatory rela-tions between the Christian and the Muslim groupsof Senegal, and Nasser considered Islam as an essen-tial part of Egyptian life and which, perhaps, couldassist the revolution.

The early 1950s throughout the 1960s witnessedthe continent’s rejection of the inherited capitalistplanning of the colonial authorities and an increasingyearning to do away with the state of sluggish eco-nomic growth in the face of mounting demandsby the rural and urban populations for the modernservices of education, health, and the other welfareprograms for which high agricultural and industrialproductivity was seriously sought by the nationalistbureaucracies. The failure of most African states, how-ever, to ensure successful achievements of these goalsled to an acute drift from free-market capitalist plan-ning to a complete adoption of socialist policies forwhich more state powers were adamantly enforced. Itwas with these drastic transformations in the structureof state bodies that Africa passed the cold war era withsubtle alliances that mostly reinstated an African cultof leadership rather than installing deep consistentchanges in the social structure for the vast majority ofthe poor populations.

In a few African states, significant changes inpolitical representation, land reform, and a vitalaccess to health and education nonetheless enabledthe peasants and the working urbanites to acquireparliamentary seats and a few portfolios in the cabi-net. The emphasis of socialist ideas on national unityand popular mobilization and the effective sharingby the poor peasantry and the working people instate management motivated many African libera-tion movements to eradicate apartheid in SouthAfrica; liberate Congo, Angola, and Mozambique;and open up intriguing approaches for state plan-ning and development programs. The African social-ist experiences, however, were largely marked withshort-lived systems of rule that further ensued in theemergence and growth of bureaucratic-authoritarianregimes—the totalitarian police-states that seriouslycurtailed civil rights and public freedoms. Before theend of the 1980s, therefore, many African socialists

advocated liberal democracy as the best alternative tostate socialism.

Starting with Gamal ’Abd al-Nasser’s massivenationalizations of the Suez Canal Company andthe feudal lords’ land ownership in Egypt, KwameNkrumah announced unrelenting war to combatneocolonialism in Ghana and the whole continent,and Amilcar Cabral armed revolutionary activists toliberate Guinea Bissau from Portugal. Signaling theengagement of Africans in the cold war era, a waveof pro-Soviet ideologies embraced the African states,for which eager intellectuals developed schools ofsocialism that uniquely added African thought to theEuropean-based Marxist doctrine.

The African socialism of Julius Nyerere was closelylinked in Tanzania with self-help programs and thepan-African movement. In general, the commoncharacteristics of African socialism embodied a com-mitment to replace the free-market economies ofcolonial capitalism with state policies that graduallyled to the sequestration of private property, the pro-hibition of private firms from free trade, and themonopoly of national wealth by the state as a soleregulator of society. The result of these restrictivepolicies, however, depleted the national resourcesby security concerns, escalated the brain drain, andincreased the corruption of state officials that furtheraggravated the impoverishment of rural populations.

Kwame Nkrumah’s Towards Colonial Freedom(1947) and Class Struggles in Africa (1970) empha-sized the commonness of African cultures as abasis for emancipation of the African continent.His consciencism aimed to end exploitation, solidifyclass divisions, and promote planned egalitariandevelopment and social justice. By the mid-1960s,the Nkrumah-led pan-African movement success-fully motivated the African heads of state to signthe establishment of the Organization of AfricanUnity (OAU) in Accra, and the following yearssaw the African Charter for Human and People’sRights that embraced both nationalist and socialistorientation.

Theoretically, the African socialist state aimed toincrease popular participation in national decisionmaking. The state-socialist changes of the EgyptianPasha feudalism culminated in the Charter forNational Action in 1962. It defined the objectives ofthe Arab world as freedom, socialism, and unity.

The enforcement of state socialism, regardless ofpopular participation in decision making, by Mu’amar

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

Qadafi in Libya, Siyad Berre in Somalia, MangistuMariam in Ethiopia, Kaonda in Zambia, and Ja’farNimeiri in Sudan alienated many national and demo-cratic parties and generated similar repercussions: theSudanese Socialist Union (SSU) (1970–1985) createdmore problems for the state and society than it wasoriginally established to reform. Excessive use ofadministrative and financial powers by the SSUruling elite consolidated state hegemony and isolatedthe masses from policy making. In Algeria, theFront Islamique du Salut (FIS: the Islamic SalvationFront) was the victor, giving rise to opposition bythe ruling military and violent confrontationsbetween the two.

— Mahgoub El-Tigani Mahmoud

Further Readings

Arhin, K. (Ed.). (1993). The life and work ofKwame Nkrumah. Trenton, NJ: African WorldPress.

Hopwood, D. (1982). Egypt: Politics and society1945–1981. London: Allen & Unwin.

Hughes, A. J. (1963). East Africa: Kenya, Tanzania,Uganda. Baltimore: Penguin.

Rawson, D. (1994). Democracy, socialism, anddecline. In A. I. Samatar (Ed.)., The Somalichallenge from catastrophe to renewal. Boulder,CO: Lynne Rienner.

Willis, M. (1996). The Islamist challenge in Algeria:A political history. New York: New York UniversityPress.

4 AFRICAN AMERICAN THOUGHT

African American thought has been uniquelyinfluenced by the African love of nature, crueltiesof aggression, and an increasing need to adapt tohostile environments and to contribute creatively toovercome the challenges of new worlds, civilizations,and lifestyles tremendously different from the Africanancestral heritage. The resistance of Africans to thehardships of life in the new world, including enslave-ment, sexual exploitation, and cultural genocidewas strongly articulated in the works of the succeed-ing generations of the African American thinkers

AFRICAN AMERICAN THOUGHT 25

who purposefully aimed to ensure constructiveparticipation of the black people in communityaffairs, sciences, and technological advancement bythe full enjoyment of civil liberties and the otherconstitutional rights.

The early writings of Frederick Douglass, Maria W.Stewart, Sojourner Truth, Ida B. Wells-Barnett, AnnaJulia Copper, Booker T. Washington, Marcus Garvey,and William Edward Burghardt (W.E.B) DuBois,among many others, revealed consistent striving forthe observance of social justice, with persistent empha-sis on the cause of liberation, unity, and the persever-ance of human dignity in the American society. Rootedin the centuries’ spirituality of Africa, the AfricanAmerican thought was largely influenced by spiritualleaders. The use of spiritual principles to uplift thesocial status of blacks was forcibly applied by MarcusGarvey, a founder of pan-African and a self-sufficiencydoctrine for blacks in the diaspora, as well as ElijahMuhammed, the founder of the Nation of Islam,who taught his disciples blacks had been the chosenchildren of God. The civil rights movement markedthe leadership of the Nobel Laureate Martin LutherKing Jr., of the southern Christian churches, whotaught millions of demonstrators in the civil rightsmovement era that “character, not color” was the deter-mining criterion for human merits, and the Muslimleader El-Haj Malik El-Shabazz (Minister Malcolm X)of the Nation of Islam, whose teachings impacted theconcern of African Americans with the ethics of power.

The African American contemporary thoughthas been developed by generations of the AfricanAmerican thinkers who continued to develop thecenturies-old intellectual-activist tradition in moderntimes. This included the liberation schools of blackthought that adopted both liberal and socialistphilosophies in the pursuit for citizenship rights andprivileges of the good life within American democ-racy. Anne Walker Bethune, Na’im Akbar, AngelaDavis, Nyara Sudarkasa, Manning Marable, MaulanaKarenga, Frances Cress Welsing, and Nobel LaureateToni Morrison introduced new scholarly concepts tostrengthen the blacks’ social movement for personalintegrity, political activity, and economic prosperity.Toward this end, the African American thought drewheavily from the history of the continent of Africa,the contributions of Africans in the American andCaribbean diaspora, and the need to emulate culturalheritage to reconstruct the image of blacks “in theirown interests.” Stressing the deep concerns of African

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AFRICAN AMERICAN THOUGHT26

value systems with justice, discipline, and productivebehavior, the Kawanza doctrine exemplified the AfricanAmerican concern for unity, self-determination,collective work and responsibility, cooperative eco-nomics, purpose, creativity, and faith.

Faced by the challenges of adaptability in the newworld, the need for effective social equality andwomen’s rights occupied a central part of the AfricanAmerican thinking, which further impacted theinternational literature on social equality and thestriving for women’s rights. Early endeavors weregreatly initiated by Sojourner Truth and Ida Wells,who called for the eradication of enslavement andall racist attitudes from society with direct publicspeech and community-based activism. Wells-Barnett(b. 1862) developed a reputation for intelligence,eloquence, and public persona, since she was the firstblack person to initiate a legal challenge to theSupreme Court’s nullification of the 1875 Civil RightsBill, regarding Wells’s appeal versus the Chesapeakeand Ohio Railroad train in May 1884. Wells encour-aged the establishment of the national black women’sclub movement to advance women’s status, andhelped to revive the Afro-American League nationalorganization to promote black unity. She became edi-tor of the Evening Star and another black weekly,called Living Way, as well as editor and part owner ofthe Memphis Free Speech and Headlight. Her earlyjournalistic emphasis was on children and education,but that changed dramatically in 1892 to a strongcampaign against lynching, in which she wrote apowerful exposé entitled “Southern Horrors: LynchLaw in All Its Phases,” and toured the country andeventually Europe to speak against this terrorism,probably in the most radical statements made by anAfrican American leader of the time.

Booker T. Washington’s (1856–1915) “accommoda-tionist” philosophy was expressed in his speech inAtlanta, in 1895: “In all things that are purely social,we can be as separate as the fingers, yet one asthe hand in all things essential to mutual progress.”This was described by DuBois as the “Atlanta Com-promise” and noted as socially retrogressive andpredicated on “Uncle Tomism” racist discriminationagainst blacks. Du Bois believed that Washington’sconservatism appealed to white America, whosepoliticians—both northern and southern—courtedhim because of his declaration to the world that polit-ical and social equality were not priorities for blacks.Instead, Washington recognized the nature of racism

in the South, where 90% of black Americans lived, andhe suggested that what they wanted—and should bewilling to work very hard to get—was economic pros-perity, out of which all else might follow.

Frederick Douglass (1817–1895) was a pioneeringabolitionist, orator, and journalist, who initiated aschool of thought that merged the spiritual activity ofchurch sermons with liberal journalism and a lifelongcommitment to political activism. Assisted by anti-slavery women, his North Star paper helped to pro-mote the antislavery movement with a strong supportfor an independent, organized movement for women’ssuffrage and other rights. In 1848, the Seneca FallsConvention in New York, led by Elizabeth CadyStanton, discussed the social, civil, and religiousconditions and rights of women.

The multiple-perspective activist school of Douglasswas diligently developed throughout the 20th centuryby the distinguished academician W.E.B. DuBois(1868–1963), the first black to receive a PhD fromHarvard University (in history), and a sociologist,writer, and educator who taught Latin, Greek, English,and German. Opting for a vanguard role for AfricanAmerican intellectuals to excel as social change agentsin American society, DuBois worked in higher educa-tion for the establishment of “The Talented Tenth,developing the Best of this race that they may guidethe Mass away from the contamination and death ofthe Worst, in their own and other races.” Concernedwith the social progress of colored peoples, he pur-sued scholarly work from his early career to study ThePhiladelphia Negro (1899), among many other suc-ceeding works. His deep knowledge about the civiliza-tion heritages of Africa, coined with a liberal socialistpolitical activism, motivated him to become “the lead-ing intellectual voice of black America,” cofounder andleading participant of the pan-African Movement,cofounder of the National Association for the Advance-ment of Colored People (NAACP), and editor of itsmagazine, The Crisis.

Afrocentricity, a contemporary African Americanschool of thought, has largely benefited from the ear-lier emphasis of Black thinkers on the African culturalheritage as a fundamental source to promote the psy-chological, ideological, and political well-being ofblack peoples. Molefi Asante reinvigorated the Africanframe of reference to establish the self-worth andcreativity of the African person. Criticizing Westernreformist and traditional theories of psychology,Na’im Akbar and Frances Cress Welsing stressed the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AFRICAN AMERICANS 27

intellectual repression that had victimized the blacksof America with mental degradation since enslave-ment times. Welsing provided a new psychologicalapproach, rejecting race supremacy and asking for ahealthy code of self-awareness by black males andfemales for the achievement of justice “in a commoneffort against injustice to express the strongest possiblestatement about respect and love for themselves as indi-viduals.” Furthering the tradition of the early pioneersof African American thought, the post-civil-rights erathinkers Anne Walker Bethune, Angela Davis, NyaraSudarkasa, Manning Marable, Maulana Karenga,Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison, and hundreds ofothers shared a renewable concern for the AfricanAmerican present-time and future generations: cher-ishing the African cultures and the African Americanheritage, preserving sisterly, extended-family relations,increasing access to high education and jobs, andactively participating in the intellectual search withinthe democratic life of America for an African-basedphilosophy and a viable plan of action.

Toward this end, Manning Marable theorized thatjustice demanded affirmative action based on raceand gender to address continuing patterns of inequal-ity. Marable suggested defining a new moral assign-ment and vision of emancipation. He believed thatequality is about social justice and the realities ofhuman fairness, such as health care, education, housing,jobs. Stressing the “consideration of duty to one’sfamily, community, or society,” Nyara Sudarkasa hasnoted the vital role that black families consistentlyplayed in the advancement of African Americansfrom racism, gender discrimination, and poverty.Sudarkasa has emphasized the complementary rolesof black women and men in the family.

African American concern for the improvement oftheir social, political, and economic status helped agreat deal to bring to light the affirmative action legis-lation, which can be viewed as a way to help minori-ties “catch up” by delivering access to the benefits andopportunities historically reserved to white people.The principles of affirmative action continue to beinterpreted and refined through court action. Legalopinion on affirmative action is inconclusive. TheSupreme Court decided in 1978 that race can be usedas a criterion for admission to undergraduate orgraduate and professional schools or for job recruit-ment, as long as race is combined with other criteriaand racial quotas are not used. In 1996, however, theUniversity of California Board of Regents decided to

eliminate race, but not social class, as a basis foradmitting students to its campuses. Also in 1990, inHopwood v. Texas, a panel of judges of the FifthCircuit Court of Appeals in Texas ruled as unconsti-tutional the affirmative action admissions policy ofthe University of Texas, Austin, law school.


See also African Thinkers, Social Change

Further Readings

Andersen, M. L., & Taylor, H. (2000). Sociologyunderstanding a diverse society. Belmont, CA:Wadswoth/Thompson Learning.

Hine, D. C., & Thompson, K. (1998). The history ofblack women in America: Shining thread of hope.New York: Broadway Books.

Karenga, M. (2002). Introduction to black studies. LosAngeles: University of Sankore Press.

King, M. L., Jr. (1962).Why we can’t wait. New York:Harper & Row.

Marable, M. (1997). Black liberation in conservativeAmerica. Boston: South End Press.

Staples, R. (1999). The black family. Belmont, CA:Wadsworth.

Sudarkasa, N. (1996). The strength of our mothers.Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press.

4 AFRICAN AMERICANS

The quest for equality among African Americans hasalways been difficult, and some may argue with goodreason that our present-day society has much furtherto go in reaching a semblance of equity for thisminority group in American society. A casual perusalof economic, social, and political situations in theUnited States makes this quite evident.

African Americans are unique in a number ofways. Their skin color distinguishes them fromother citizens, and their history is distinct in thatmost of their ancestors were brought to Americaagainst their will under a legalized system of slavery.How many can say the same about their heritageas it relates to the United States? The institution ofslavery to which African Americans were subjectedlasted from their arrival to the end of the Civil War.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AFRICAN AMERICANS28

Even after the conclusion of the war between thestates, the conditions of African Americans in manyparts of the United States were not noticeablydifferent than pre–Civil War days, despite the Eman-cipation Proclamation and the passage of a numberof amendments to the Constitution. This wasclearly demonstrated by the emergence of the KuKlux Klan—an extremist group dedicated to whitesupremacy that numbered in the millions at one timein the United States.

To complicate matters, the U.S. Supreme Courtlegalized segregation in this country when it enunci-ated the famous “separate but equal” doctrine via thecase of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896). Hence, states couldand did segregate African Americans by the passageof Jim Crow laws, which mandated separate facilitiesfor them. The Plessy doctrine lasted until 1954, whenthe Court reversed itself in the famous case of Brownv. Board—which outlawed legal segregation or de juresegregation in public schools on the basis of race.However, there was massive resistance to the imple-mentation of this important court decision in manyparts of the United States. In addition, the reality ofan integrated educational system did not evolve theway some had hoped it would after this prominentcourt case. In fact, some may argue that there isanother type of segregation at work, de facto segrega-tion, which involves a variety of economic and social

factors, such as housingpatterns, not mandated bylaw. This type of segrega-tion has been quite difficultto eradicate in Americasociety.

The 1960s have oftenbeen described as a turbu-lent time for AfricanAmericans in the UnitedStates, primarily becausethey were required to paya heavy cost for neededsocial, economic, andpolitical improvements intheir lives. Two importantfederal laws were passedby Congress as a result ofobvious social and politi-cal inadequacies. One wasthe Civil Rights Act of1964—a law that provided

African Americans the opportunity to receive equalpublic accommodations in areas such as restaurantsand hotels. It was followed the next year by theVoting Rights Act of 1965, which resulted in moreAfrican Americans not only having the right to votebut the election of many others to public office. Bothlaws resulted from many unjust hardships enduredby African Americans for too long a period of time.

Governments and other agencies have also enactedpolicies of affirmative action to provide AfricanAmericans and other groups with employment andeducational opportunities as a means to achieve abetter life. Increased educational opportunities areparticularly important, since the level of formal edu-cation that one obtains is often related to the level ofone’s economic income.

As for the future, on one hand, some will arguethat laws and policies have increased opportunitiesfor African Americans that were not available anumber of generations ago. In addition, it is certainlytrue that the African American presence is morenoticeable in many areas of our society. Some of themore prestigious and powerful positions in oursociety are now occupied by African Americans. Onthe other hand, some may say that the AfricanAmerican presence is yet a distinct minority amonga greater mass of citizens who traditionally havebenefited from this country’s advantages. They may

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AFRICAN THINKERS 29

also note that we have two distinct and differentsocieties, both unequal in terms of opportunity andother factors.

Many of our large cities are seeing a migration ofwhites and others who can afford it to the more afflu-ent suburbs, causing a resurgence of segregation inbusiness and housing. The trend has also affected theintegration of urban schools as a means of achievinga greater understanding and tolerance for our fellowcitizens. Yet it has also resulted in increased politicalopportunities in large American cities for AfricanAmericans, as well as for more employment opportu-nities in municipal governments. The importantquestion today is, How many African Americans arereally experiencing these benefits? Many in Americaare still far from it.

— William E. Kelly

See also Affirmative Action

Further Readings

Bever, E. (1996). African Americans and civil rights:From 1619 to the present. Phoenix, AZ: OryxPress.

Jackson, M. N., & Lashley, M. E. (Eds.). (1994).African Americans and the new policy consensus:Retreat of the liberal state? Westport, CT:Greenwood Press.

Jackson, R. L. (1999). The negotiation of culturalidentity: Perceptions of Europeans and AfricanAmericans. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Polednak, A. P. (1997). Segregation, poverty, andmortality in urban African Americans. New York:Oxford University Press.

4 AFRICAN THINKERS

In the cradle of humanity, Africa, thought was creativelypracticed in a natural environment of bountifulnessand human diversity. Languages, artistic works,inscriptions, cave paintings, and architectural constructsof huge irrigation schemes and other colossal monu-ments testify to the intellectual abilities of the Africanpeoples who thought about them, and then designedand erected them. In the deeply rooted African spiri-tuality, the African thought was expressed in a great

many deities, rituals, ethical stands, and religiousteachings.

Since ancient times, African thinkers used thousandsof languages that have been grouped in the largefamilies of the Saharan, Sudanic, Kordofanian, andothers. Some of these languages were written inEgyptian hieroglyphics, Nubian Meroitic, EthiopianGeez, or Arabic. Perhaps one of the oldest inscrip-tions in Africa is the Stale of Piankhi, the Nubian kingwho invaded Egypt and founded the 25th Dynasty(ca. 734), which reads “I am a king, the image of God,the good divine one, beloved of the divine ones.”Another stale by Ethiopian King Ezana of Aksum(325 CE) carried with it a story of invasion. TheAfrican thinkers were also some of the earliest toestablish cosmological doctrines on theology andmonotheism. The Egyptian Pharaoh Akhenatencalled for the veneration of the one almighty Lord,instead of the polytheist deities of his time.

African thinkers have contributed distinguishedachievements to the arts and sciences, for example,the knowledgeable architect Imhotep, builder of thefirst pyramid, who was equally a prime minister,philosopher-teacher, and father of medicine. Thecontinent witnessed prolific leaders of thought in themedieval times. In the 15th century, among the Maliand the Songhay, Timbuktu and Jenne began theirlong careers, with ideas from their schools of theologyand law spreading far into Muslim Asia. ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Khaldun of Tunisia (1332–1406) was aresearcher on education and psychology, a politicalactivist and a statesman, a jurist and judge who inno-vated autobiography as well as a scientific methodol-ogy for the science of history and founded a scienceof sociology in the course of his rigorous research tocorrect the reported events of history.

Endowed with intensive knowledge about the holyKoran, the Hadith (the Prophet’s sayings and deeds),monotheism, jurisprudence, linguistics, poetry, meta-physics, natural science, mathematics, arts and foreignlanguages, Ibn Khaldun spent about 8 years authoringhis magnanimous masterpiece Muqaddimat IbnKhaldun (the Ibn Khaldun Introduction), which isone of the seven volumes, Kitab al-’Ibar wa Diwanal-Mubtada wa al-Khabar (The Book on Events onthe Days of the Arabs, the non-Arabs, the Berber, andContemporary Relatives of the Superior Sultan).Excluding some historical events as “impossible”judged by “the nature of things,” the methods ofscientific research and the rules of investigating

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AFRICAN THINKERS30

historical events as “codes of society,” the Muqaddimatdealt with the study of “the ‘Umran [societal lifeor sociological activity], social phenomena, ownership,authority, acquisitions, craftsmanship, sciences, andthe factors and the causes underlying them.” IbnKhaldun’s history of the Berber is perhaps thestrongest, richest, and most genuine historicalresearch. The French historian Dozy described hisaccurate writing on Spain as “outstanding: nothingof the sort is found or comparable in the accountsof the medieval Christian westerners of whom noone successfully documented what Ibn Khaldunclearly wrote.”

Ant’nor Firmin, a Haitian thinker, is considered apioneer of anthropology in the African domain. Earlyin 1885, Fermin realized that the human speciesappeared in various parts of the world with the sameprimordial constitutional imprint of the species, thesame intellect and that same morality as in the origi-nal human blueprint.

In recent times, a number of African writershave added significant strides to our knowledge ofthe continent’s societal life and challenging realties,as they penetrated the arenas with intriguingthought. The Sudanese writer Jamal, a foundingmember of the 1962 African Encyclopedia, authoredSali Fu Hamar, a collection of stories on the Africanmythology, as well as other literary works on theAfrican cultural and political affairs. The first Africanwriter to be awarded a Nobel Prize in literature in1986, the Nigerian writer Woll Soyinka earned hisfame with a consistent critique of authority imposi-tions upon the personal freedoms of people and thesevere repercussions of state intrusions with respectto the peaceful competition in power relations.Soyinka addressed the traditional African rituals thatcontinue to influence the mentality of Africans: “Theking has died, and his horseman is expected by lawand custom to commit suicide and accompany hisruler to heaven.”

Based on rigorous anthropological investigationon the impact of human geography on human behav-ior, Diop, a Senegalese historian and cultural anthro-pologist, developed a theory on the north and thesouth cradles of civilization in Europe and Africa,respectively. Diop discovered “for certain that ancientEgyptian Pharaonic civilization was a black civilization.Herodotus had no interest saying that ‘the Egyptianshad black skin and frizzy hair.’” According to Diop,“The harsh and for long periods cold climate in

Europe gave rise to the patriarchal family system.”Diop showed that Ethiopia [Nubia], Kush, and Ta-Set,the world’s first nation state, were “matriarchal.”Focusing on the Egyptian female, Nawal El-Saadawi,a prolific writer who has authored several plays,mostly translated into international languages, hasanalyzed with factual materials the current state ofaffairs of African and Arab women. Including herdeep insights in The Hidden Face of Eve (1977), thestories of El-Saadawi have unveiled the conflicts ofmodernity with traditional forms of life in thesociety, in which women, in particular, suffer maledomination and state repression.

African thought has been remarkably geared andengineered to address reality with a view to helpenforce optimum change—a deeply rooted traditionthat the African American scholar Maulana Karengaeloquently conceptualized as “the intellectual-activisttradition.” This norm, moreover, should be furtherlinked to the richness of the continent and thecolorful life of its peoples since ancient times, whichfurther explains the African diverse, prolific, andmultiple forms of thinking, compared with strictspecializations of thought experienced in other places.The Cairo Trilogy and the other stories of NaguibMahfuz have analyzed the lively experiences of people,the contrasting portrayals of secular versus profanesituations in the spheres of family, neighborhoods,educational institutions and government agencies, andthe contradictory encounters both women and menconfront within the context of the African oriental life.


See also African Thought

Further Readings

Diop, C. A. (1996). Towards the African renaissance,essays in culture & development (1946–1960).Egbuna P. Modum, trans. London: Karnak House.

Ferraro, G. (2003). Cultural anthropology. Belmont,CA: Wadsworth.

Hafez, S. (2001). Naguib Mahfuz—The Cairo trilogy:Palace talk, palace of desire, sugar street. New York:Everyman’s Library.

Karenga, M. (2002). Introduction to black studies(3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Sinakore University Press.

Woll, S. (2002). Death and the king’s horseman.New York: W. W. Norton.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGGRESSION 31

4 AGGRESSION

Aggression is simply defined as “Any form of behaviordirected toward the goal of harming another livingbeing who is motivated to avoid such treatment.”Aggression is most commonly studied in its applica-tion to humans and may include both verbal con-frontations and physical gestures. Singular aggressionbetween two humans is the most typical form ofaggression found in the social world. The most destruc-tive occurrence of aggression is found in warfarebetween sovereign nations. Numerous studies andanalyses of the many forms of aggression reveal a hostof potential variables that are social, gender, racial,biological cultural/geographic, psychological, his-torical, and even situational factors.

Aggression is usually thought of negatively becauseof its association with harm, such as in assaults andhomicides. While this may be the prevailing popularperception, the use or display of aggression is clearlyrelative to its immediate social or cultural context.Consider, for example, the aggression in competitivesports, such as boxing. The same actions outside thearena are condemned as criminal and requiring a for-mal response in the form of punishment. The ancientRomans were famous for promoting gladiatorial con-tests that culminated in the deaths of humans, all inthe pursuit of entertainment. Government punish-ment of criminals is aggression mandated by the statefor the purpose of correcting or deterring an assaultcommitted against another citizen. However, in somecultures, it is perfectly acceptable for an individualmember to exact justifiable justice or revenge. Amongother cultures, aggression may actually be prescribedin response to personal status building or statusdefense. In our culture, self-defense or defense ofanother may justify acts of aggression to the extent ofcausing death. Self-defense as a validation for aggres-sion can clearly be extended to sovereign nations.An act of war or even the threat of war is morally jus-tified because it both defends its people from poten-tial conquerors and prevents a greater harm from aprolonged bloody struggle.

An understanding of aggression begins with abroad examination of human beings and our capacityfor aggression. Why should some people have agreater willingness or need than others to displayaggression? The study of children is a particularlypopular avenue of exploration of aggression. It is

commonly understood that the behaviors a childlearns (suitable or unsuitable) can become deeplyingrained and carried into adulthood. This behav-ioral approach maintains that there are three primarysources of influence that shape a child’s behavior andcomprehension of appropriate responses: family,peers, and symbolic models.

Households in which the parents do not discipline,are permissive in the child’s expression of aggression,and use power assertion in disciplining tend to pro-duce aggressive children. The family provides theearliest socialization through the interaction of itsmembers, from which the child learns the use ofaggressive behaviors and patterns of interaction. Theinfluence of interaction with peers is also very power-ful because it provides children the opportunity tolearn both aggressive behaviors and vie for, and possi-bly establish, a coveted position of dominance. Roughplay such as chasing, catching, tumbling, and othercompetitive strength comparison activities providea usually safe means to learn some of the benefits ofaggression, such as victory and peer status/recognition.

Modeling is the third social influence on acquiredaggressive behavior in children. Live models are themost common source of childhood-learned aggres-sion, and of all the potential sources, parents arethe most powerful and far-reaching. In addition,prolonged observation of aggressive actions causesa gradual desensitization to violence and the pain orsuffering of others. Self-modeling is the effect of achild who is the victim of aggression either in thehome or at the hands of peers. The child begins toutilize aggression as a means to resolve conflict or inplay. The mass media model claims that the effectsof observing televised or filmed violence in eitherphysical or verbal forms produces childhood aggres-sion. This model has been under study for severalyears. The exact impact of viewing aggressive behav-iors by children cannot always be accurately predictedbecause of other confounding variables. However, theeffect of any two or all three influences (family, peers,and media) must certainly be significant.

Social factors are certainly not the sole influenceon human aggression, because biology may alsocontribute significantly. Various gender and psy-chological differences also account for the dif-ferences in manifestations of aggression. Muchresearch debate exists over the influence of biologyand its impact on human intellect, physical ability,and behavior and especially how it affects human

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGGRESSION32

aggression. Debate between those that embracetheories supporting the social causes of humanaggression and those that advance a belief in biolog-ical influences is commonly referred to as “natureversus nurture.” Some of the most popular biology-based research has been along the lines of heri-tability and studies of twins, adopted children, andchromosome examinations.

Twins separated at birth have been examined withregard to their histories of aggression and the recordsof both their natural parents and adopted parents.Research has revealed that adopted children display-ing generally aggressive behavior most often sharedthis same characteristic with their biological father asopposed to a low aggression correlation with theadopted father. This research supports the belief thatnature (biology) rather than nurture (environment)has a clear bearing on aggressive behavior.

Studying children has also provided another sourcefor the validation of biological-based explanations intohuman aggression. The disparity in the aggressionlevels between boys and girls is well recognized anddocumented. Research into the type of play thatchildren engage in reveals that boys are more competi-tive and their play activities tend toward a morephysical orientation as opposed to girls. When similarcomparisons are conducted on adults, the differencesare not as dramatic; however, they are nonethelessidentifiable. The disagreement over the causes of gen-der aggression differences is further complicated bystudies of chromosome variation and abnormality.The cells within the human body are comprised of23 pairs of chromosomes. In females, the pairs areboth “X shaped”; in males, the pairs contain one “X”and one “Y-shaped” chromosome. It is the “Y” chro-mosome that researchers maintain accounts for maleshaving a greater capacity for aggressive behaviorthan females. This is commonly referred to as the“Y-chromosome hypothesis.” Consistent with thisthesis is the belief that males with the rare “XYY” chro-mosome abnormality must be especially aggressiveand would likely have a criminal history of violence.However, studies of “XYY” males in prison do notsupport that particular hypothesis.

There are other potential influences on aggressionnot directly attributable to social or biological factors.We must understand that some individuals are moreaffected than others by these influences. The first ofthese effects is temperature, specifically hot tempera-ture. It is widely recognized that assault offenses

increase during the summer months, and within heatwave periods, individual irritability can be particularlyelevated. Noise levels can also impact aggression. Thesignificant contributors to noise are naturally located inthe more urban areas: automobile movements, indus-trialization, and airplane traffic. Increased noise levelshave been associated with reduced interpersonal inter-action as well as a decrease in citizens helping othersand less sociability. Associated with noise is the influ-ence of crowds or high-density populated geographicareas. The studies that have been conducted are incon-clusive with respect to what particular quality of crowdscauses increased aggression. However, it has been deter-mined that males are more affected than females.

— Richard M. Seklecki

See also Crime; War, Anthropology of

Further Readings

Baron, R. A., & Richardson, D. R. (1994). Humanaggression. New York: Plenum Press.

Humphrey, A. P., & Smith, P. K. (1987). Rough andtumble, friendship, and dominance in schoolchildren: Evidence for continuity and change withage. Child Development, 58.

Mednick, S. A., Gabrielli, W. F. Jr., & Hutchings, B.(1987.) Genetic factors in the etiology of criminalbehavior. In S. A. Mednick, T. E. Moffitt, & S. A.Stack (Eds.), The causes of crime: New biologicalapproaches. New York: Cambridge University Press.

National Research Counsel. (1993). Understandingand preventing violence. Washington, DC: NationalAcademy Press.

Perry, D. G., & Beussey, K. (1984). Social development.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

APE AGGRESSION

The study of nonhuman primate behavior allowsbiological anthropologists and other scientists tocome closer to understanding why human primatesact as they do. Traditionally, scientists have viewedmembers of the ape family as aggressive andcompetitive. More recent research, however, hasdemonstrated that apes are more inclined toward

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION 33

4 AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION

The agricultural revolution is a notion applied to awide spectrum of new kinds of human activities anda variety of new forms of social and cultural liferesulting from the practice of soil cultivation, cattlebreeding, and livestock raising. In some cases, it couldbe understood as opposition to the “Neolithic revolu-tion” concept, proposed in the 1920s by W. G. Childein order to characterize the origin of self-sufficientsocieties that produce their food. Such understandingemphasizes a broader sense of an agricultural revolu-tion versus a Neolithic one, implying at the same timetheir common economic and ecological background.Unlike the Neolithic revolution, which indicatedstrict chronological frameworks of the event, in mostcases we apply the term agricultural revolution tolong-lasting gradual processes and their historic con-sequences. So, the “evolutionary” is interpreted as“revolution,” exclusively based on its importantimpact in all spheres of human life.

Technological Components of the Agricultural Revolution

The origin of a productive economy was accompaniedby a series of technological innovations. One of the

cooperation and affiliation than aggression. Thisshift in how apes were viewed first occurred in the1970s at a zoo in the Netherlands, when Frans deWaal observed two male chimpanzees embracing oneanother immediately after a fierce fight had takenplace. De Waal maintained that the chimpanzeeswere engaged in reconciliation. After thousands ofhours spent observing members of the ape family, deWaal concluded that apes had been unfairlyidentified as killers. De Waal contends that becauseapes live in groups, community interests oftenpredominate over tendencies toward aggression.

In early 2004, primatologists Paul Garber of theUniversity of Illinois and Robert Sussman ofWashington University set out to disprove thetheory that aggression is a dominant behavior inapes. Like de Waal, Garber and Sussman discoveredthat apes were more likely to exhibit cooperationand affiliation than aggression. They found thatonly 1% of the apes’ time was spent in aggressivebehavior, while 10% to 20% of their time wasdevoted to affiliate behavior.

The notion that apes are more likely to cooperatethan fight has been borne out by a number ofresearch studies. For instance, the Yerkes NationalResearch Primate Center of Emory University inAtlanta, Georgia, concluded after long-termobservations that monkeys cooperated in order toobtain food, rather than fighting for it.Observations of chimpanzees also revealed thatwhen the animals were exposed to crowding, theyused coping methods rather than aggression to dealwith the problem. Studies of bonobo have beenparticularly instrumental in advancing theories ofnonviolent apes. Bonobos, which live in matriarchalsocieties, have been labeled as peacemakersbecause they use sex rather than aggression to dealwith confrontations that arise.

On the other hand, baboons, which are classifiedas monkeys rather than apes, have repeatedlyexhibited aggressive behavior. Recent studies,however, have also begun to question whether ornot baboons are biologically prone to aggression orwhether it is a learned behavior. After half of themales in a group of olive baboons contractedtuberculosis and died in 1983, after being exposedto tainted meat at a tourist lodge at the Masi MaraReserve in Kenya, Stanford University primatologistRobert Sapolsky observed that younger male leaders

who had migrated into the group were lessaggressive than their predecessors.

Returning to study the same troop of baboons10 years later, Sapolsky found that male baboonswere still pacific. They were also less likely to attackfemales than were baboons in other troops. Whenblood samples of the pacific baboons werecompared with those of the males who had died,Sapolsky discovered that the younger baboons hadlower levels of glucocorticoids, a hormone releasedas a response to stress. Sapolsky posited that thecontinuing lack of aggression might be the result ofobserved pacific behavior in others in the troop,combined with the efforts of female baboons thatperpetuated the pacific behavior because theypreferred a less aggressive society.

— Elizabeth Purdy

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION34

most important among them was the origin of ceramics,which is regarded as the first artificial raw materialused by prehistoric populations. Pottery enabled theprocess of boiling and cooking; it gave rise to soupsand cooked cereals, an introduction to the paleodiet,substantially broadening its spectrum of micro-elements and vitamins that human beings couldreceive from food, and changing in some manner theprocesses of metabolism. Pottery utilization alsogreatly promoted storage strategy development, whichhelped to secure subsistence as well. Beginning withprimitive handmade multipurpose forms, potterygradually evolved toward fine vessels made with thehelp of a potter’s wheel. Pottery ornamentation tradi-tionally is regarded as one of the basic ethnic markers,while the morphology of ceramic artifacts is connectedwith the sphere of their utilization and economic orien-tation of their makers.

Tool-Making Technology Improvement

The beginning of land cultivation required newtools. New forms of tools connected with wood pro-cessing (deforestation being the first stage of landpreparation) appeared at the Neolithic times, and avariety of axes is the most striking feature of the toolkit of this time. A series of tools for land cultivationwas also widely distributed. The technique of polish-ing and grinding widely distributed in the Neolithicenabled the origin of specific tools for cereal process-ing (for example, millstones, graters, and the like). Thepeculiarities of the natural habitat of early forms ofproductive-economy promoters contributed to spa-tial differentiation of their tool kits and techniques oftool production.

House building gradually replaced hunter-gatherers’temporary huts, and tent construction could beregarded as another important technological innova-tion connected with agricultural revolution. The neces-sity of looking after their crops and herds promotedthe need for a well-prepared house accompanied byspecial facilities for crop storage and domestic animalsand birds.

The origin of spinning and weaving was an inevitablereply to the need for food transportation and storage,and enabled interior house decoration as well.

Transportation meant improvement. Transport bywheel and sail is one more important technologicalelement of agricultural revolution. It mirrors theneeds of the socioeconomic processes accompanyingland cultivation and improved cattle breeding.

Socioeconomic Implicationsof the Agricultural Revolution

Transition to a Settled Modeof Life and the Premise of Town Origin

The origins of plant cultivation and cattle breedinghelped to secure the food procurement system andcontributed greatly to the creation of a rather settledmode of life. It was grounded on a relatively stablequantity of product, which could be obtained duringa long period of time from the same territory usingdifferent sources or/and different ways of theirexploitation, combining traits of hunter-gathererswith a productive economy. The most suitable areasfor living later were developed into towns with widespecialization (trade or/and crafts, war shelters, ritualand/or administration centers).

Exchange System Transformation

The establishment of a productive economy causeda transformation of the exchange process function.Traditional for hunter-gatherers’ community ritualsand “strategic” implication of exchange aimed toestablish peaceful contacts among different commu-nities after the beginning of land cultivation and cat-tle breeding was added by real economic value. Theappearance of intercommunity exchange of foodobtained from different sources in many cases guar-anteed the survival of communities and satisfactionof their vital needs and, in this way, contributed to thegrowth of prestige of early agricultural communities.The origin of the first equivalent of money, “proto-money,” occurred in such exchange. A specific formof exchange, so-called prestige, or potlatch, becameone of the basic elements of the transformation ofprehistoric communities, promoting the appearanceof individuals possessing relatively more authority,property, and power in their groups.

Surplus Product Origin, Prestige Economy

The development of farming and cattle breeding,for the first time in human history, guaranteed theexistence of surplus product during a rather longperiod of time (till the next crop or next calving, forexample). Crucial for its basic existence (excludingthe display of any sort of inequality in its frame),prehistoric society faced the necessity of managingthis surplus. The original form of prestige exchange,potlatch, which appeared at organized festivals,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGRICULTURAL REVOLUTION 35

promoted the redistribution of surplus productamong the community members.As a result, a restrictednumber of “big men,” relatively more authoritativeand wealthy persons, appeared in the historical arena.This group gave rise to private property, exploitation,and class structure formation, promoting in this waythe origin of civilization and state power.

Demographic Revolution

Food base improvement and the gradual growthof the term of occupation on the same settlementremoved earlier natural limitations on child birth rateand thus caused rapid population growth, accompa-nied by the formation of heterogeneity. Thus, territo-ries more suitable for productive economy becamemore attractive for occupation, and the tendencytoward overpopulation was demonstrated. In turn, thetension of excessive population on the territory cre-ated the first ecological problems for early farmers andcattle breeders. Most probably, one such crises origi-nated a special form of productive economy, nomadcattle breeding, which has often been interpreted as an

accelerated way to property accumulation, trade, andnonequivalent exchange development. Territories withexcessive population density gave rise to the first wars,contributing to an early form of exploitation.

Ideological and CulturalDisplays of Agricultural Revolution

Another development in the productive economywas the appearance of leisure, that is time free fromsubsistence, in particular from food procurementactivities. And the needs of new forms of economyand social relations required rational knowledgeas well as an ideological background and ritualsanction.

The fertility cult is one of the most striking featuresof mental life with origins in the productive economy.Fertility cults usually were accompanied by the growthof the role of Woman-Mother (foremother), as wellas inspiration by natural forces and phenomena.Common economic backgrounds and the extremeimportance of such forms of ideology in everyday life

Source: © iStockphoto/William Walsh.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGRICULTURE, INTENSIVE36

of early agriculturists caused the curious situation inwhich similar ritual activity was realized in principallydifferent forms in different locations.

Rapid development of astronomy and time-countsystems could be regarded as a specific element of theagricultural revolution and at the same time as itsnecessary premise. The first calendars enabled rationaland well-timed agricultural processes, in this wayguaranteeing surplus product.

Protoscientific knowledge development (zoology,veterinary, etiology, agronomy, genetics, geography,climate, and soil studies, among others) also con-tributed greatly to the development of agricultureand promoted the rise of its effectiveness.

Primitive writing systems used for the fixation andtransmission of new knowledge systems and newlyformed traditions is also connected with the agricul-tural revolution.

Other Displays of theAgricultural Revolution

The gradual transition from hunter-gatherers to anagricultural mode of life was accompanied by changesin human morphology. This is displayed in the modi-fication of facial and postcranial (connected withthe consumption of boiled instead of roasted food),the degradation of human dens (because of lack ofnecessity to chew fresh vegetation), and many diseasesand epidemics connected with a stationary mode oflife that included constant contact with animals.

Alongside the weakening of the human body, thenatural habitat also deteriorated. Human society hasparticipated in the disturbance of the balance innature by its intervention into physical geographicprocesses, in particular, by deforestation, by soilerosion, and by introducing new sorts of plants andanimals into environments.

Changes in the mode of life, from a subsistencesystem to the formation of a prestige exchange net-work, resulted in the degradation of prehistoric socialdogmas and stereotypes and promoted modificationof the marriage system (polygamy) and changes incommunity structure (formation of lineage) andkinship systems.

It should be stressed, nevertheless, that mostcomponents of the agricultural revolution displayedthemselves only when farming and cattle breedingbecame not only a guaranteed supplement but thenecessary bases of food procurement system in

prehistoric populations. The replacement of hunting,gathering, and fishing in prehistoric subsistence wasa long and gradual process, whose realization in dif-ferent parts of the world depended on a set of naturalgeographic, economic, and cultural agencies.


See also Agriculture, Origins of; Anthropology, Economic;

Further Readings

Mathewson, K. (2000). Cultural landscape andecology III: Foraging/farming, food, festivities.Progress in Human Geography, 24, 3.

Smith, B. (1999). The emergence of agriculture.New York: Freeman.

Vasey, D. E. (1992). An ecological history of agriculture,10,000 B.C.–10,000 A.D. Ames: Iowa StateUniversity Press.

Vink, A. P. A. (1975). Land use in advancingagriculture. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

4 AGRICULTURE, INTENSIVE

Agricultural intensification can affect any of theinputs of an agricultural system—the crops planted,the labor expended, and the productivity exacted fromthe land. It can be driven by increasing populationrelative to the land available or by changes in marketprices and demand for crops. It can result in dramaticinvestments in and transformations of the landscape,and it can be accompanied by, but will not necessarilyresult in, intensive social change.

There are several ways of categorizing the changes inintensive agriculture. In small-holder systems, inten-sive agriculture is marked by high investments of timein weeding, planting, and especially watering crops andmanuring the soil. Several crops will be planted in thesame field and mature at different times, and fields willalso be worked several times a year as long as condi-tions support growth. All this requires a high pop-ulation density and a strong work ethic. In Chaggaagriculture on Kilimanjaro, Tanzania, for example,competition for land is high, and use of space intensi-fied by the complex systems of agroforestry that arepracticed. These involve planting shade-tolerantspecies (yams, coffee) intermingled with banana and

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGRICULTURE, INTENSIVE 37

fruit and timber trees. In anthropology, the work ofRobert Netting is probably the most well-known cor-pus of study on the ecology and practices of intensivesmall-holder agriculture in diverse parts of the world.

Agricultural intensification can be driven by popu-lation increase. This has been famously theorizedby Esther Boserup in The Conditions of AgriculturalGrowth. Boserup, in contrast to Malthus, saw popula-tion growth as the independent variable driving agri-cultural and social change, not as the consequence ofagricultural output or social systems. But the changesresulting are also intimately related to market pres-sures and increased demand for crops. The develop-ment of labor-intensive irrigated agriculture in thePare mountains, in Tanzania, for example, is thoughtto have preceded their dense settlement and wasdriven by the need to acquire livestock for marriagethrough trade with neighboring pastoralists. Similarly,there are many cases where population increase hasnot been marked by intensification.

The landscapes of intensive small-holder agricul-ture have tended to attract admiration from peoplewho enjoy the gardenscape of different patches ofintensive use. Some of the most dramatic anthro-pogenic landscapes in the world are the complexlayers of irrigated rice terraces, which can produce5 to 10 tons per hectare per year (higher yields aredependent on advanced technology). One famousstudy of intensification in Machakos, Kenya, hasrecorded the transformation of a land characterizedby extensive land use and apparent erosion to a gar-denscape of trees, terraces, and well-tended land.

But we should note that changes in landscape arenever socially neutral. The Machakos case was widelyreceived as a good-news story of averted degrada-tion. But at the same time, the transformation in theland has had its social costs, with poorer familiesfinding it harder to cope with population pressure. Inother parts of Africa, investment in agriculturalintensification and land improvement is reduced

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGRICULTURE, ORIGINS OF38

because of the changes they portend to social supportmechanisms. Similarly, the intensification of agricul-ture in the United Kingdom in the 18th and 19thcenturies was accompanied by an extraordinarily vig-orous enclosure movement, which concentrated landin the hands of wealthy estate owners. Improvingestates was intimately bound up in denying othersaccess to rural resources. Clifford Geertz has famouslycharacterized change in Indonesian agriculture as“Agricultural Involution,” which saw increased laborinvestment in agriculture with no real increase in percapita productivity.

The diversity and intricacy of small-holder inten-sive farming stands in sharp contrast to the land-scapes and practices of capital intensive agriculture.This is characterized by monocropping; heavy invest-ment in machinery and chemicals, which maximizesproductivity per person; as well as working withhigh-yielding, fast-maturing crops and animals. Thespread of scientifically and, more recently, geneticallyengineered crops has been associated with globalbooms in production (the Green Revolution) andat the same time erosion of the genetic diversity ofcrops; increased use of pesticides, fertilizers, andantibiotics; and a decline in the quality, especiallytaste, of food.

Capital intensive farming’s great service is that itprovides cheap food, which, as Bjorn Lomborg noted,means that people are healthier from the betternutrition. But it has provoked opposition in diversequarters. First, there are the environmental costs ofpesticides and fertilizers, and there are also potentialproblems of feeding growth hormones and antibioticsto domestic stock, as these may affect consumers.Fears here and dissatisfaction with the miserable livesof factory-farmed animals have generated a wholeindustry of “organic” agriculture. Second, there is atendency to produce a great deal of food where thereis no market for it, and this leads to “dumping” offood at low prices in places where there is apparentdemand, but at considerable cost to local producers.The fact that this agricultural production can beheavily subsidized makes the whole situation ratherperverse. Others observe that factory farming andagribusinesses can be characterized by low wages andpoor working conditions.

Nonetheless, agricultural development is generallyassumed to mean greater intensification along thelines of capital intensive agriculture practiced in theGlobal North. It was the hallmark Netting’s work to

resist that assumption. Intensive agriculture, Nettingargued, could be achieved in other ways apart fromconcentrating land and resources to a few farmerswho work the land with machines and chemicals.Small-holder agriculture could be just as productive,with fewer environmental costs and different sorts ofsocial costs.

— Dan Brockington

See also Aztec Agriculture; Ecology and Anthropology

Further Readings

Geertz, C. (1963). Agricultural involution: the processesof ecological change in Indonesia. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Kates, R. W., Hyden, G., & Turner B. L. II. (1993).Population growth and agricultural change inAfrica. Gainesville: University of FloridaPress.

Netting, R. McC. (1993). Smallholders, householders,farm families, and the ecology of intensive,sustainable agriculture. Stanford, CA: StanfordUniversity Press.

4 AGRICULTURE, ORIGINS OF

The origins of the practices of soil cultivation, cropharvesting, and livestock raising traditionally areregarded as the main criteria of transition to the nextstage of human society and culture developmentfollowing hunter-gatherers community and directlypreceding the formation of state and private property.The premises of the origin of agriculture as well as themechanisms of its dissemination over the worldremain under discussion in contemporary culturalanthropology.

Theories and Premises

One of the earliest explanations of the origin ofagriculture was proposed by G. Childe, in his idea of“Neolithic revolution.” According to Childe, droughtand supply shortage stimulated food production inoases. Later, demographic agency has been put for-ward as a necessary background of transition tothe productive economy (L. Binford), alongside a

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGRICULTURE, ORIGINS OF 39

wide spectrum of social and ecological factors(R. Braidwood, K. Flannery, C. Renfrew, V. Masson,V. Shnirelman, L. White, and many others). Today,most researchers tend to interpret the origin of agri-culture as the inevitable response to a crisis in the tra-ditional hunter-gatherer economy and the necessityof securing a subsistence system in a new ecologicalsituation. Alongside a disparity of natural resourcesand human needs, other factors contributed to theorigin of agriculture, such as presence of plantssuitable for cultivation and human knowledge aboutthe biological peculiarities of these plants.

Mechanisms and Chronology

The mechanisms and chronology of the origin ofagriculture traditionally are conceptualized through-out several binary oppositions existing in prehistoricscience for the last two centuries. Monocentric versuspolycentric paradigms are rivals when discussing theplace of plant cultivation origin; in the frameworks ofeach theory, revolutionary versus evolutionary viewscoexist. At the same time, in different case studies,early farming has been interpreted as fundamental tolate prehistoric population subsistence system or onlyas an additional food supply alongside hunting, gath-ering, and fishing.

Today, agriculture dissemination over the world isconsidered a long-lasting process that was generatedindependently in several regions (primary loci), start-ing around 9,000 BC (“effective” village stage, Jarmoculture of the Middle East). Harvest collecting arosefrom seed gathering. The earliest evidences of plantdomestication are traces at Natufian settlements ofPalestine, Shanidar, and Ali Kosh (in present-day Iranand Iraq) and are dated about 9000 BC to 7000 BC.

Seven primary loci of agriculture origin, hugeareas where the transition to an agricultural mode oflife was based on a complex of cultural plants, havebeen distinguished by Soviet geneticist N. Vavilov:

1. East Mediterranean locus, or Fertile Crescent (Iran,Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Turkey); 9000–7000 BC;wheat, barley, rye.

2. South Asian locus (southern China, southeasternIndia, and southeastern Asia); 7000–5000 BC; rice,tuberousals.

3. East Asian locus (Mongolia, Amour region, northernChina); 7000–5000 BC; Chinese millet, beans.

4. Sahara and Sudan; 4000–3000 BC; pearl millet,sorghum.

5. Guinea and Cameroon; 4000–2000 BC; yams, beans,oil-bearing palms.

6. Mesoamerican locus (central and southern Mexico);9000–4000 BC; maize, amaranth, string beans, pump-kins, peppers, garden trees.

7. Andean locus (Colombia, Ecuador, Bolivia);7000–5000 BC; potatos and sweet potatos, manioc,amaranth.

Historical Significanceand Economic Consequences

The historical significance and economic conse-quences of the development of agriculture are con-nected, first of all, with the cyclical character andlong-lasting effects resulting from the regularities ofland cultivation and harvesting. Improvement ofsuch activity required the formation of a settled modeof life, the concept of land as property, and labor divi-sion in its social (gender, age) as well as seasonalforms. These tendencies led to the transformation ofthe whole system of social distribution of food supplyand material valuables of the society. The possibilityof obtaining predictable excess of the products gavethe opportunity (or even necessity) for its holders(“big men”) to organize ritual ceremonies (potlach),which resulted in the growth of their importance inthe community. A so-called prestige economy led tothe formation of property and social inequality and,in turn, to the formation of social classes, exploita-tion, and political organization.

Transition to the settled mode of life required theformation of many sorts of household activities nec-essary to secure the livelihood of early farmers. Theorigins of ceramic production, spinning, weaving,advanced tool production technique and means oftransportation, and other phenomena are connectedwith the needs of a new form of production. First, thenegative consequences of early farming (environmentpollution, forest reduction, soil deterioration, infec-tions, and epidemics) also could be traced as early asthe Neolithic.

Agriculture improvement necessarily accompaniedwith development of rational knowledge in the field ofplant biology and soil peculiarities; weather predictionand first calendars have been elaborated at that time.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AGRICULTURE, SL ASH-AND-BURN40

A new form of ideology was required to accom-modate the new form of production and secure itsrepetition by following generations. Fertility cultsand cosmogony and the beginning of deificationof elements of nature coincided with the advent ofagriculture.

The diversity and global character of the historicalconsequences of the transition to agriculture, and itsdeep influence on all spheres of human life, are rea-sons to consider this phenomenon as the backgroundfor the “wide-spectrum revolution” theory proposedby K. Flannery.


See also Agricultural Revolution; Agriculture, Intensive

Further Readings

Higgs, E. S. (Ed.). (1972). Papers in economicprehistory. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Hutchinson, J. (Ed.). Essays on crop plant evolution.(1965). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rindos, D. (Ed.). (1984). Origins of agriculture: Anevolutionary perspective. Orlando, FL: AcademicPress.

4 AGRICULTURE, SLASH-AND-BURN

Slash-and-burn agriculture, sometimes known asswiddening or shifting cultivation, involves felling treesand vegetation on a plot of land, leaving them to dry,and then setting fire to them. Crops planted on theplot benefit from the nutrients provided by the ash. Adiversity of crops tend to be planted and intermingledwith each other. Depending on the fertility of the soil,once cleared, a plot is used for a further 2 to 5 yearsbefore being left to fallow. The reasons for abandoningplots vary. It may reflect decreased soil fertility, exces-sive weeding effort, or combinations of both.

Slash-and-burn agriculture has been widely prac-ticed in human history. It is still extensively used intropical forests, where some 250 to 500 million peopleare thought to practice it. Slash-and-burn agriculturecan also be viewed as an extensive early stage in theevolution of agricultural practice to more intensivemeasures. Depending on the fallowing time, it will

require 10 to 30 hectares per person. The fallowingperiod will decline with the increasing populationdensity, with attendant consequences for soil fertilityand agricultural practice. But where slash-and-burnagriculture is not practiced just for subsistence, but isone of several pursuits within more diverse livelihoods,it will be less directly dependent on population density.

Slash-and-burn agriculture has its advocates. Itminimizes human effort, while maximizing the inputof energy from burnt vegetation. It can leave largertrees protecting the soil from vigorous rains. Thetiming of the burns, the temperature of the flames,and planting the right mix and rotation of crops cantake considerable skill.

But slash-and-burn agriculture has rarely beenpopular in development or conservation circles. Itwas castigated in the early years of agricultural devel-opment for being wasteful and inefficient or lazy.This overlooked both its productivity, per person, andthe ecology of intercropping. It is currently widelycriticized for its impact on biodiversity conservationwhere habitat conversion is assumed to be drivenby increasing populations and intensity of use. Thethreats are real, but these criticisms can exaggerate theblame due to small holders, when more profoundforces drive their action. They also privilege the roleof population growth, when other forces are moresignificant. Finally, they can overplay the detrimentalconsequences of anthropogenic disturbance, withoutacknowledging that disturbance can foster biodiversityat some scales.

— Dan Brockington

See also Cultivation, Plant; Ecology and Anthropology

Further Readings

Lambin, E. F., Turner, B. L., Geist, H. J., Agbola S. B.,Angelsen, A., Bruce, J. W., et al. (2001). The causes ofland-use and land-cover change: Moving beyond themyths. Global Environmental Change, 11, 261–269.

Moore, H., & Vaughn, M. (1994). Cutting down trees.Gender, nutrition, and agricultural change in thenorthern province of Zambia, 1890–1990. London:James Currey.

Sponsel, L. E. (1995). Indigenous peoples and the futureof Amazonia: An ecological anthropology of anendangered world. Tuscon: University of ArizonaPress.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALEUTS 41

4 ALCHEMY

The last few decades have seen the growth of a vigorousresearch program investigating alchemy and a subse-quent increase in our understanding of how it func-tioned both in late antiquity and early Europe. Theultimate origins of alchemy, however, are still obscure.Different scholars place its genesis either in Egypt,India, or China. In fact, the difficulties posed by a his-torical field of study that spans three continents andnearly two millennia are increasingly leading studentsto speak in terms of “alchemies” rather than seeing themovement in unified or totalizing terms.

Two basic goals, common to many historicalschools of alchemy, were the creation of a universalmedicine, capable of curing disease and extendinglife, and the mastery of the art of transmutation. Thetechnical body of knowledge that supported theseaims apparently arose out of the workshops of Egyptbetween 500 BCE and 200 CE. An investigation ofperiod sources, such as the Leyden Papyrus X and theStockholm Papyrus, show that Egyptian artisans andjewelers had become skilled at making glass, artificialgems, pigments, and even being able to change theproperties of gold or other metals through usingchemical dyes or alloys.

Nevertheless, true alchemy did not emerge untilthe third and fourth centuries of the current era, whenthese technical procedures were combined with Greekthought and philosophy. Authors such as pseudo-Democritus, Zosimos, and Stenphanos of Alexandriasought to integrate this body of art with both classicphilosophical texts and more contemporary Hellenisticmovements like Neoplatonism and Gnosticism. It wasonly after these associations were made that the phe-nomenon known as alchemy can be said to have existed.Interest in the subject was maintained and advanced byArab scholars after the seventh century. Like many otherforms of knowledge, they were primarily responsible forimporting it into Europe through works by authors likeJabir Ibn Hayyan, pseudo-Gerber, and Avincenna in thelate 12th and 13th centuries.

Interest in alchemy started to wane rapidly in Europeafter the early 17th century as new theories of matterand chemistry emerged. Little notice was taken of thissubject until the 19th century. Due to the Romanticmovement, popular interest in alchemy increased,and it became associated with magic and astrology,which were also very much in vogue at the time. These

19th-century interpreters of alchemy sought to preservethe art by transforming it from a mode of inquiry aboutthe natural world into an esoteric spiritual practice.This move was erroneously accepted by later scholarswho were primarily interested in the perceived psycho-logical or mystic nature of alchemical symbols, ratherthan their ability to convey technical knowledge.Perhaps the two most well-known authors usingalchemy in this way were Mircea Eliade and Carl Jung.While their work made important contributions to thefields of psychology and comparative religion, theirportrayal of the underlying subject matter was flawed.Recently, historians have become sensitive to theseissues and are attempting to restore our understandingof this important phenomenon to its proper context.

— Benjamin N. Judkins

Further Readings

Eliade, M. (1979). The forge and the crucible: Theorigins and structure of alchemy. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Jung, C. C. (1970). Mysterium coniunctionis:An inquiry into the separation and synthesis ofpsychic opposites in alchemy. The Collected Worksof C. G. Jung (Vol. 14). Princeton: PrincetonUniversity Press.

Klossowski De Rola, S. (1997). The golden game:Alchemical engravings of the seventeenth century.New York: Thames & Hudson.

Linden, S. J. (2003). The alchemy reader: From HermesTrismegistus to Isaac Newton. New York:Cambridge University Press.

Newman, W. R. (2004). Promethean ambitions:Alchemy and the quest to perfect nature. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Principe, L. M., & Newman, W. R. (2001). Someproblems with the historiography of alchemy. InA. Grafton & W. Newman (Eds.), Secrets of nature:Astrology and alchemy in early modern Europe.Cambridge: MIT Press.

4 ALEUTS

The Aleuts inhabit the Aleutian Archipelagos thatspan from the Alaska Peninsula to the CommanderIslands in Russia. Their original name is Unangan andUnangus, meaning “the people.” Their aboriginal

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALEUTS42

lifestyle was based on survival and developed inresponse to their environment in this land they called“the birthplace of the winds” and “the cradle ofstorms.” They fashioned unique tools from the materi-als available on their barren islands and learned to uti-lize every valuable part of their prey or what theygathered. Claiming their hunting grounds in both theNorth Pacific and Bering Seas, they became experthunters in boats fashioned from driftwood and skin.The first was their primary hunting vessel, the iqax,which became known as the kayak (the Russians calledit a baidarka). The second was a vessel crafted largeenough to transport their families in. The weather onthese treeless, volcanic islands is nearly uniform intemperature, with high winds the Aleuts say can be“like a river.” Their skill in reading the currents andnavigating in the constant fog was key to their sur-vival. Did the ancestors of the Aleuts cross the Beringland bridge and/or arrive via watercraft, huntingmammals along the edges of Beringia? Are they moreclosely related to the Eskimos or the Natives in thesoutheastern part of Alaska, the Tlingit and Haida?How have the changes since post-European contactaffected the people known as the Aleuts?

The New World

During the last glacial maximum (formed betweenAsia and America), known as Beringia, also the Beringland bridge, it was first speculated that the ancestors

of the Aleuts made their way bywalking into the New World to settlein the circumpolar zone of theAleutian Islands. Stronger support isforming for maritime entrance intothe New World as more evidencesurfaces, like the discovery of fossilsof bears carbon-dated to more than12,000 years ago and of a young mandating back more than 9,000 yearsago, on Prince of Wales Island insoutheast Alaska, which was thoughtto be glacially covered. Dr. Tim Heatonis doing the study of these fossils andthe possibility of glacier-free areas,existing along what now are islandsthat border Alaska. This opens thepossibility that Aleuts, as well as otherNative Americans (either during orafter other glaciating processes) could

travel via waterway to the Americas.Due to the location of the Aleuts and the various

traits they exhibit, questions have developed as towhat Native group the Aleuts originated from, eitherthe Eskimos or the Tlingit. William S. Laughlinpresented that the Aleuts came from the “proto-Eskimo-Aleut culture.” Linguists like Swadesh,Hirsch, and Bergsland suggest that the Aleuts sepa-rated from a proto-Eskimo-Aleut Language around4,000 years ago. Mitochondria DNA research byDennis O’Rourke and Geoff Hayes reveals that theAleuts became their own people about 6,000 years ago.

Did the Aleuts come by land or sea? Was the splitprior to or after the linguistic Eskimo language?Within these equations is an Aleut myth, mentionedin Baidarka as a Living Vessel: On the Mysteries of theAleut Kayak Builders (1988), which backs a theorythat the Aleuts migrated from the east (the mainland,after arriving either easterly by land or westerly bywater). In this account, the Aleuts moved aftertheir “creation,” from the overpopulated Chilkak(translation perhaps “Chilkat,” a Haines, Alaska, area)so they could have their own land.

Lifestyle, Kayaks, and Feasts

The winter home construction was semi-subterranean,allowing several families to coexist, as each familyhad their section of the building. Being a paternalnonequalitarian society, the people lived in accordance

Aleut dancers

Source: Photo courtesy of the Aleut Corporation.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALEUTS 43

with their status in a hierarchy, with a chiefat the top and slaves at the bottom. Duringthe nomadic summer hunting seasons, ahole would be dug (at their choice of camp)for sleeping, and woven mats of grass wouldbe used to cover the ground or for blankets.Their parkas would be laid on top of themats for warmth and insulation. Parkaswere made from the fur of walrus, seals, cari-bou, bear, and bird skins. Waterproof over-shirts were made from sewn strips of walrusintestines. There was no campfire; to gainheat, a small smoldering fire was made fromgrasses, and then the person would standover it, and then lower his or her parka.

Their main vessel, the kayak, was uniquein design:

• It had a cleft bow to cut through the waves.• It was stated to be so light, even “a child”

could carry it.• The original design was made with bone

and stone joints for flexibility.• This complex design was made from

memory.• It was clocked at 7 to 10 miles an hour.

Each season, the chief occupation withinthe settlement was survival, and all activitieswere geared to the preparation and produc-tions of food, in hopes of accumulating anabundance to celebrate the numerous “pot-latches” throughout the feasting fall andwinter season. The months were named inaccordance with the activities through theyear, beginning in March, which was “a timeof eating skin.”Around this month, the foodsupply was spent, and the weather was sobad, the only option left was to forage for mollusks andperished sea mammals washed ashore, and when nonecould be found, then the skin obtained from the previ-ous season became their meal.

Spring brought migrating birds, which were caughtwithin whalebone nooses. Pinnipeds of large numbersmade brief stops to the island chain en route to theirnesting rookeries on the fringes of the Bering Sea.From spring to autumn, the rivers spawned threevarieties of salmon. Also, from early spring to lateautumn, migrating fur seals from as far as Californiawere hunted with darts. Late spring to early summer,

the sea otters arrived (the most coveted fur for clothing).Summer brought whales, walrus, berries, and edibleroots, as well as grasses for basket weaving.

Winter was the season of celebration, a timeof feasting, dancing, and masks. Aleut potlatchesresembled those of the northwest coast Natives. Thewinter festivals included the distribution of gifts andperformances of accessional reenactments in songsand dances. Many of the same themes and activitiesof northwest potlatches existed, such as the funeralpotlatch, the killing or freeing of slaves during thistime, games, and Raven (a common thread to the

Shumagin Islands of the Aleutian chain

Source: Photograph by Tony Ise.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALEUTS44

North Pacific Rim “First People,” from Russia downto Washington); he is also a hero in their myths, andthey likewise considered him their ancestor.

Enter the Europeans

During the second Kamchatka Expedition(1733–1743), Vitus Bering (commanding the St. Peter)and Aleksey Chirikov (the St. Paul), encountered islanddwellers, who at that time were called the Unangan(the eastern dialect) and the Unangus (the westerndialect), which means “the People,” at Unga and NagniIslands. It was after this trip that these people becameknown as the “Aleuts,” though the origin of this nameis unknown. The discovery of the wealth of fur avail-able at the Aleutian Islands started a “fur rush” toAlaska. The Russians claimed a sovereignty over theland they called “Alyeshka,” from 1741 to 1867.Skirmishes developed when the Russians beganenforcing a dominant role in the Aleuts’ lives, as well askilling entire villages. The world of these Arcticpeoples, their culture and sustenance for thousands ofyears, disappeared in large part due to their adoptionof the Russian Orthodox religion; their dependence onEuropeans for clothes, food, other merchandise, andwage earning; and general assimilation to Europeanculture. Parts of the Aleut culture were totally lost, asShirley A. Hauck found in her study about how theaboriginal Aleut music became extinct due toEuropean contact.

When the “sale” of Alaska wastransacted, this also brought manychanges to the Aleut community.For example, the original homeswere semi-subterranean, but theAmericans transported lumber tobuild houses on the island, andthey were very drafty in compari-son and brought sickness to eldersand young children. A new lan-guage was enforced when a lawpassed in 1866 concerning publicschools that only English could bespoken. Also, the Aleuts, especiallythose of the Pribilof Islands, werethe only Alaskan Natives to becomesubjects of America in the serviceof fur companies. The Americansalso indiscriminately overhuntedthe fur seals, so that by 1913, their

extinction was feared and the United States declared a5-year sealing holiday.

World War II

On June 7, 1942, a Japanese invasion came to theIsland of Attu, resulting in 42 villagers, both Aleutand Caucasian, being taken as prisoners of war andrelocated to Otaru, an island in Japan, for 3 years.The American government responded by orderingthe evacuation of the Aleutian and Pribilof Islands,sending 881 Aleuts from nine villages to camps called“duration villages” in southeast Alaska for 2 years.The Aleuts left their islands with suitcases and blanketrolls and the memory of their villages burning. In1944, the Aleuts were allowed to return to theirhomeland, but four of the villages were never to beinhabited again.

Aleuts Today

The Aleuts appear to have survived by becomingskilled in their ever-expanding environment. They aretrue children from “the cradle of the storms,” havingsurvived wind and cold, volcanoes and earthquakes,oppression by fur traders, World War II invasion andrelocation, as well as other challenges as they evolvedinto modern life. Today, the Aleut language is beingtaught in schools, as well as the culture. A young

Modern Aleut Dancers reenact their cultural history

Source: Photograph courtesy of the Aleut Corporation.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALFRED 45

13-year-old Aleut, John Bell(Bennie) Benson, made his markin history with the design of theBig Dipper for the Alaska State flag,in a contest prior to Alaska’s state-hood. An Aleut artist, ThomasStream, from Kodiak, has becomean abstract artist, blending Aleutsubjects into his gouache paintingsand playing a part in evolvingAleut art with colorful and playfulthemes. The Aleutian Chain hasbecome a home to the tourist andfishing industry. With airports,computers, and other expandingluxuries, the present-day Aleutshave emerged as a modern people,reclaiming and honoring theirancestral culture and redefiningwhat it means to be an Aleut, to bean Unangan.

— Pamela Rae Huteson

See also Athabascan; Native Peoples of the United States

Further Readings

Hauck, S. A. (1986). Extinction and reconstruction ofAleut music and dance. Doctoral dissertation,University of Pittsburg. Ann Arbor, MI: UniversityMicrofilms International.

Jochelson, W. (1966). History, ethnology, andanthropology of the Aleut. Oosterhout, TheNetherlands: Anthropological Publications.

Kohlhoff, D. (1995). When the wind was a river.Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press in anassociation with Aleutian/Pribilof IslandsAssociation, Anchorage, AK.

Liapunova, R. G. (1996). Essays on the ethnography ofthe Aleuts: At the end of the eighteenth and the firsthalf of the nineteenth century (J. Shelest, Trans.,W. B. Workman & L. T. Black, ed. assist.).Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press.

Lubischer, J. (1988). Baidarka as a living vessel: On themysteries of the Aleut kayak builders. Port Moody,Canada: Baidarka Society.

Rubicz, R., Schurr, T. G., Babb, P. L., & Crawford,M. H. (2003). Mitochondrial DNA variation andthe origins of the Aleuts. Human Biology, 75,809–835.

4 ALFRED

ALFRED (the ALelle FREquency Database) is anInternet-accessible database designed to store andmake available frequencies of alleles of DNA-basedhuman polymorphisms for multiple populations,primarily for the population genetics and molecularanthropology communities. The emphasis remainson populations typed for multiple polymorphismsand polymorphisms typed on multiple populations.Allele frequencies at each site are linked to the specificpopulations and specific samples of those popula-tions with descriptions. When available, haplotypefrequencies are also included. Each polymorphismsite is linked to molecular definitions and to molecu-lar databases.

As of January 2005, ALFRED had data on 1,051polymorphisms, 399 populations and 23,179 fre-quency tables (one population typed for one site).ALFRED is accessible from http://www.alfred.med.yale.edu. Data in ALFRED come from two sources:They are extracted from the literature, or they aresubmitted by researchers. From either source, dataincluded in ALFRED are carefully curated and multi-ple links established, making it possible to retrievedata through many pathways. All of the data inALFRED are considered to be in the public domainand available for use in research and teaching.

Aleut dance group wearing traditional Aleut regalia

Source: Photograph courtesy of the Aleut Corportation.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALGONQUIANS46

Populations are organized by geographic regions,and each population record is annotated with alternatenames (synonyms), linguistic, geographical locationinformation, and links to external databases. The pop-ulation descriptions in ALFRED are meant to be help-ful but not fully comprehensive. The ability to retrieveadditional information on populations is provided byactive links to linguistic and ethnographic databases.Population samples are organized by populations andannotated with sample information such as samplesize and relation to other samples. Genetic polymor-phisms are defined primarily by their locus and allele.Loci are organized by chromosome, and each locusrecord is annotated with alternate names (synonyms),chromosomal position, a valid locus symbol, and linksto external databases. Polymorphisms and haplotypesare organized by locus, and each polymorphism recordis annotated with dbSNP rs#, alternate names (syn-onyms), ancestral allele, and links to external databasesfor expanded molecular information. Thus, ALFREDprovides links to both molecular and anthropologicdatabases. Each allele frequency record is linked to thepopulation sample information, polymorphism infor-mation, typing method, and the publication the fre-quency was extracted from. All publication entries arelinked to PubMed. Every record in ALFRED has aunique identifier (UID) that can be used in publica-tions to reference specific data.

Flexible methods of querying ALFRED are available.The queries can start with loci, population, publicationauthor, ALFRED UID, dbSNP ID (rs#, ss#), geographicregion, or a combination of gene name and populationname. The results of frequency searches can be viewedboth in graphical and tabular format. The graphicalstacked-bar format offers a quick visual display of thefrequency variation among populations. On the otherhand, the tabular format offers frequency values andrelated information, which can be used in analysis tools.

Several other means of retrieving data are beingdeveloped. One is a geographic interface that displayspopulations on maps and can also display graphics ofdata at the map location of the population.

Data in ALFRED are available for downloads indifferent user-friendly formats. Allele frequency datafor individual polymorphisms can be downloaded insemicolon-delimited format. The entire database canbe downloaded in XML format by following thelink provided in the Web site (http://www.alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/xmldatadump.asp). Depending onrequirements, a researcher can download the entire

database with or without the descriptions or have thetables separately downloaded in XML format. Inaddition, the allele frequencies, polymorphism, andpopulation information tables in ALFRED are alsoprovided in downloadable text files. Data in these filescan be seamlessly imported into Excel spreadsheetsfor further analysis.

A Web page has been prepared for the purpose ofproviding guidelines to users for submitting data toALFRED (http://www.alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/AboutALFRED.asp#datasubmission). We are request-ing that researchers help us by submitting their datausing the Excel spreadsheet provided at this page.

Graphical overviews of the database contents canbe viewed at the page (http://www.alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/alfredsummary.asp). A “sites per popula-tion” Web page (http://www.alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/sitesperpop_graph.asp) shows graphically (andnumerically) the number of allele frequency tables foreach population. A “populations per site” Web page(http://www.alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/popspersite_graph.asp) similarly represents the number of allelefrequency tables for each polymorphic site.

ALFRED has a page dedicated for user registration(http://www.alfred.med.yale.edu/alfred/registration.asp). The primary benefit of registering is to receivethe ALFRED newsletter. The newsletter provideshints on how to efficiently use ALFRED for variouspurposes and will provide highlights and recent addi-tions to ALFRED on a regular basis.

ALFRED is supported by the U.S. National ScienceFoundation.

— Kenneth K. Kidd

See also Computers and Humankind; Genetics, Human;Genomics; Human Genome Project

4 ALGONQUIANS

Algonquian is a linguistic term that describes the lan-guage family belonging specifically to a large numberof North American Native nations. The Algonquianlinguistic family is believed to have originated from aProto-Algonquian parent language spoken as far backas 2,500 to 3,000 years ago. The area in which it origi-nated is thought to have been located betweenGeorgian Bay and Lake Ontario. The Proto-languagehas since then developed into many variations as a

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALGONQUIANS 47

consequence of migration patterns, historical relation-ships, European contact, and environmental changes.

Algonquian languages were spoken throughoutNorth America, across the Great Plains to the easternseaboard and north from the Canadian Subarctic toNorth Carolina in the south. We categorize Algonquianlanguages into three geographic areas that include

• the Plains Algonquian languages spoken in centraland northern Great Plains

• the Central Algonquian languages spoken around theGreat Lakes, north from eastern Quebec throughManitoba and from Labrador west to Hudson Bayand Alberta, and

• the Eastern Algonquian languages spoken from theGulf of St. Lawrence south to coastal North Carolina.

The distribution of the Algonquian languages restsas one of the largest language expansions over NorthAmerica. Due to their wide geographic distributionand location along a broad swath of the eastern NorthAmerican coast, the Algonquian nations were the firstwith which Europeans had contact. Approximately halfof the Algonquian languages were spoken in theEastern Algonquian regions, while the others wereconcentrated within the eastern woodlands and north-ern plains. The Iroquoian nations neighbored theAlgonquian nations in the eastern and southern areas,as the Siouan nations bordered on the south. TheAlgonquian nations were surrounded on the southwestand west by the Muskhogean and Siouan nations,on the northwest by the Kitunahan and the greatAthapascan language families, and on the north, thecoast of Labrador, and east of Hudson Bay by the Inuit.Although we recognize early relationships amongAlgonquian languages, these are difficult to confirmbecause some Algonquian languages vanished or dis-appeared before they could be studied. Some suggestthat, when explorers first came in contact with NativeAmerican people in North America, there might havebeen as many as 300 Native American languages beingspoken. By 1960, only around 80 of these languageswere still being spoken but mainly by older genera-tions, individuals over 50 years of age. Historicallymany Algonquian speakers could converse in morethan one language and often, in several. Beginning inthe 17th century, Christian missionaries and travelersformulated much of the histories of the Algonquianlanguages. Because the accumulation of research fromthe earliest ages is sparse, we see gaps within the

chronological picture of the Algonquian history. As aconsequence, the history includes bias and misunder-standing. By the 19th century, a number of scholarsbegan research in Algonquian comparative studies.

Micmac (Mi’kmaq) is spoken in parts of NovaScotia; Prince Edward Island; eastern New Brunswick;Gaspé, Québec; Labrador; and Boston. Maliseet-Passamaquoddy is spoken in western New Brunswickby the Maliseet and in eastern Maine by the Pas-samaquoddy. Etchemin was spoken between Kennebecand St. John Rivers. Some suggest that Etchemin origi-nated from Maliseet-Passamaquoddy and EasternAbenaki. Eastern Abenaki was primarily spoken incentral and western Maine. Different from EasternAbenaki, Western Abenaki was spoken in St. Francis,Québec; Massachusetts; Vermont; and Sokoki, NewHampshire. The English translation of the French wordloup is wolf. Given this name by the French, it is specu-lated that Loup A was spoken in areas of centralMassachusetts and the Connecticut Valley. Loup B hassimilar dialects to Western Abenaki and Mahican.Massachusett was spoken in southeastern Massachu-setts, Cape Cod, the Elizabeth Islands, Martha’sVineyard. and Nantucket. Narragansett was spoken inRhode Island. Mohegan-Pequot-Montauk was spokenin eastern Connecticut and the eastern portion of LongIsland. There is not sufficient information on Quiripiand Naugatuck-Unquachog-Shinnecock, but some sug-gest that these were also spoken in western Connecticutand Long Island. Mahican lived in areas from LakeChamplain along the southern Hudson River to easternNew York, western Massachusetts, and northwesternConnecticut. One of the Delaware languages, Munsee,was spoken on western Long Island, southern New York,and in northern New Jersey. The Munsee was laterfound in areas within Ontario, such as Moraviantown,Munceytown, and Six Nations. Another Delaware lan-guage, Unami, was spoken in southern New Jersey,Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Oklahoma. Nanticoke wasspoken in Maryland and, more specifically, Piscatawayto the west of the Chesapeake. Powhatan was spoken inVirginia, from the Potomac south to the James River.Pamlico was spoken in northeastern North Carolina.

Central Algonquian

The Shawnee frequently relocated but lived mainly inOklahoma. Sauk-Fox was spoken in central Oklahomaand on the Kansas-Nebraska boundary. Kickapoo wasspoken in Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, and Coahuila,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALGONQUIANS48

Mexico. Miami-Illinois was spoken in Indiana, Illinois,and in eastern Oklahoma. Potawatomi was spokenaround Lake Michigan, and later spoken in Wisconsin,Kansas, Indiana, Michigan, Oklahoma, and possiblyOntario. Ojibwa languages are spoken from southwest-ern Québec through Ontario, Michigan, northernWisconsin and Minnesota, southern Manitoba, andsouthern Saskatchewan. Algonquin language is spokenin Western Quebec and adjoining areas in Ontario.Cree is spoken across Canada, from Labrador west-bound to Alberta. Menominee is spoken in north-eastern Wisconsin.

Plains Algonquian

Blackfoot is spoken on the Blackfeet Reservation innorthwestern Montana as well as on various reserves inAlberta. Cheyenne is spoken in southeastern Montanaand western Oklahoma. Arapaho is spoken on theWind River Reservation in Wyoming and in westernOklahoma. Atsina, also known as Gros Ventre, wasspoken on the Fort Belknap reservation in northernMontana. Nawathinehena was last spoken in the early20th century and is only known by a short wordlist.

Linguistics of the Algonquian Language

From the study and reconstruction of languages, lin-guists are able to theorize about the relationshipsamong groups of individuals that use similar terminol-ogy within their language systems. One technique usedto assist in discovering which Aboriginal nations wereassociated with a shared mother tongue within a cer-tain area is the reconstruction of languages. This tech-nique involves the reconstruction of words used todescribe flora and fauna. The next step involves thesearch for a region in which all of these terms are asso-ciated. All Algonquian languages are different but theyshare similar features that enable them to be placedtogether within the same language family. Algonquianlanguages are moderately simple in association tofeatures of tones, accent, and voicing. The Proto-Algonquian language consists of four vowels—i, e, o,and a—that have both long and short qualities.Semivowels include y and w. The Algonquian word ischaracterized as being overall slightly complex in refer-ence to syntactics. Algonquian words are considered tohave themes. These themes include a root and a suffixcalled a final. The final plays an important role indetermining the part of speech. Themes also include

Eastern AlgonquianMicmac (Mi'kmaq)Maliseet (Malecite)PassamaquoddyEtcheminEastern Abenaki (Penobscot)

Caniba, Aroosagunticook, Pigwacket Western Abenaki (Abnaki) (St. Francis)Loup A (Nipmuck)Loup BMassachusett (Natick)

North Shore, Natick, WampanoagNarragansettMohegan-Pequot

Mohegan, Pequot, Niantic, MontaukMontaukQuiripi (Quinnipak) (Connecticut)

Naugatuck-Unquachog-ShinnecockMahican

Stockbridge, MoravianMunsee (Delaware)

Munsee, WappingerUnami (Delaware) (Lenape)

Northern, Southern, UnalachtigoNanticoke

Nanticoke, Choptank, Piscataway (Conoy)Powhatan (Virginia Algonquian)Pamlico (Carolina Algonquian) (Pamtico) (Pampticough)

Central AlgonquianCree

Eastern Cree dialectsEast Cree, Naskapi, Montagnais

Western Cree dialectsPlains Cree, Woods Cree, Western Cree, Swampy Cree, Eastern

Swampy Cree, Moose Cree, Mithchif, AtikamekOjibwa (Ojibway) (Ojibwe) (Chippeway)

Saulteaux, Northwestern Ojibwa, Southwestern Ojibwa, SevernOjibwa, Central Ojibwa, Ottawa (Odawa), Eastern Ojibwa,Algonquin

PotawatomiMenominee (Menomini)Sauk-Fox-KickapooMiami-Illinois (Peoria)Shawnee

Plains AlgonquianBlackfootCheyenne

Cheyenne, SutaioArapaho-Atsina-Nawathinehena

Arapaho, Atsina (Gros Ventre), NawathinehenaEastern Algonquian

A list of Algonquian languages arranged withinthe three general North American locations.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALGONQUIANS 49

verbs, nouns, pronouns, or particles. Grammaticalcategories belonging to Algonquian languages are notdistinguishable by gender-based terms. Instead, distinc-tions correspond on the basis of living and nonlivingentities. These living and nonliving entities are definedas inanimate and animate categories. Edward Sapir, alinguist, characterizes Algonquian words as “tiny imagistpoems.” This may be a reflection of the use of grammat-ical categories corresponding with that of nature insteadof being gender-based, as with many other languages.Examples of animate nouns include persons, animals,spirits, large trees, various fruit, and body parts.

There has been a constant concern over the possibil-ity of losing more Native languages in North America.In the past, language loss has been primarily due todeath and disease in which entire nations were extin-guished. Beginning in the late 1800s, assimilationspolicies resulted in the prohibition of Native languagesuse in residential schools and the removal of NativeAmerican children from their families. This resulted inthe erosion and loss of language by a break in the oraltransmission of language to future generations. In thepast, Native American communities were forced outof their traditional territories by encroachment ofFrench and European settlers. One of the conse-quences of these relocations was, indeed, languageloss, with the coastal languages as prime examples.The factors associated with the loss of Aboriginal lan-guages in Canada today is migration, marriage, edu-cation, and employment. In a 1996 survey fromStatistics Canada, only 26% of 800,000 Aboriginalpeople had an Aboriginal language as their mothertongue and even fewer claimed to speak it withintheir homes. Within the Algonquian language family,the languages that continue to remain in use includeArapaho, Blackfoot, Cheyenne, Cree-Montagnais-Naskapi, Ojibwa, Algonquin, Potawatomi, Menominee,Sauk-Fox-Kickapoo, Maliseet-Passamaquodda andMi’kmaq. Many of these languages are on the vergeof extinction, such as the Tuscarora language. InCanada, for example, only 3 of the 51 Aboriginal lan-guages that exist today are thought to survive.Aboriginal and Native American communities are,however, struggling to revive and strengthen the useof their languages and cultures. Postsecondaryschools throughout North America offer classes thatconcentrate on cultures and languages within theirNative Studies programs. For example, TrentUniversity in Ontario, Canada offers courses inOjibwa. There has been an increase in Aboriginal

media coverage, networks, and programming.Traditional stories, songs, and histories are beingrecorded and transmitted to Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal communities. The internet is also beingused to teach languages, for example, the Kitigan ZibiAnishenabeg community teaches Algonquin on itswebsite. There has been an increase in the number ofconferences and events that are held to celebrate,teach, and express Native American culture, language,and art, all of which aids in strengthening a variety ofAboriginal cultures and languages.

Although Algonquian speakers vary in customs,beliefs, and environments, there are many sharedqualities. For example, the Algonquian peoples sharethe belief in a Great Spirit, frequently referred to asManitou, and other teachings and ceremonies commonto their history and culture. Although these ceremonieshave regional variations, ones common among theAlgonquian peoples include the sweat lodge, healingcircles, medicine wheels, and shaking tent. Some cere-monies are no longer practiced by some Algonquianspeakers. North of the Great Lakes, wild rice was har-vested, where it was plentiful. Members of most nationshunted bison, but they were most abundant within theGreat Plains. Hunting, fishing, and gathering wildplants, seeds, and fruit were primary food sources, espe-cially when agriculture was not a main focus. Through-out Algonquian-speaking territories, there is a renewaland revitalization of traditional language and cultureto aid in healing the present generation from the scarsof colonization and past assimilation policies.

— Simon Brascoupé and Jenny Etmanskie

Further Readings

Boas, F., & Powell, J. W. (1991). Introduction. InF. Boas, J. W. Powell, & P. Holder (Eds.), Thehandbook of American Indian languages and Indianlinguistic families of America north of Mexico.Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Flannery, R. (1939). An analysis of coastal Algonquianculture. Washington, DC: Catholic University ofAmerica Press.

Mithun, M. (1999). The languages of native NorthAmerica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Silver, S., & Miller, W. R. (1997). American Indianlanguages: Cultural and social contexts. Tucson:University of Arizona Press.

Slawych, D. (1999). Aboriginal languages headed forextinction. Wind Speaker, 16, 9.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALIENATION50

4 ALIENATION

Alienation refers to the process by which individualsbecome disconnected or divorced from their socialworlds. It also operates on a broader societal levelwhen the very forces created by human beings appearto be separate and alien from their creators. Theconcept is commonly used by economic and politi-cal anthropologists questioning the conditions ofmodernity.

Alienation is frequently used in anthropologicalanalyses to describe the general state of estrangementthat human beings may feel living in late-capitalistsociety. The following sample of research topics illus-trates the diversity of contexts in which it is used.Ethnographic analyses have employed the concept instudies of the penetration of money-based economiesinto exchange/gift-based economies in African andLatin America, in acculturation studies of non-Western indigenous people, in studies of the effectsof industrialization and the implementation factoryregimes, in studies of consumption in Western andnon-Western societies alike, and in studies of reli-gious evangelization. Feminist critiques argue thatthe split between humanity and nature and the divi-sion of reproductive and productive labor serve toalienate masculine identity. Research on the com-modification of human bodies, where buyers, sellers,and even the contributors consider their body partscommodities for sale and consumption, best illus-trates how profoundly alienated humans are in thecontemporary market-based society in which theylive. Despite this wide use of the concept, very fewstudies have used alienation as a guiding theoreticalperspective.

The first major discussion of alienation is byHegel in Phenomenology (1808). He critiqued thenotion that human consciousness was separatefrom the world of discrete objects. For him, all truthand reality is part of human thought. Even con-ceiving of a discrete objective, worlds of nature orculture are forms of alienation. The goal of humansis to uncover how they are connected to andhow they construct these seemingly independentobjects and reconceptualize them as part of theirself-consciousness.

Most anthropologists draw on Karl Marx’s conceptof alienation. Marx criticized the Hegelian concep-tion, because he argued that Hegel’s notion that

alienation would cease with the eradication of theexternal world was false. He contended that humansare part of the external world and must come tounderstand their relationship with it.

Marx’s concept, alienation, is similar to that ofDurkheim’s concept, anomie. Both apply to the gen-eral estrangement an individual feels from their socialworld, but what distinguishes these terms from eachother is that anomie relates to the loss of moralfeelings of connectedness people experience whenreligious and secular rituals cease to function toreproduce the community. By comparison, Marxemphasizes the collective loss of control humans haveover their material conditions. For example, workersare alienated because they lack control of production.The use of money furthermore alienates producersand consumers from the material conditions of pro-duction and obscures the real social relations thatexist among individuals and individuals with theprocesses of productions.

For Marx, alienation within the domain of laborhas four aspects: workers are alienated from theobjects that are produced, from the very processes ofproduction, from themselves, and from their commu-nity. All this occurs because workers cease to recog-nize their connections with the material world. Whatoccurs, according to Marx, is that the alienated prod-ucts of human labor, commodities, appear to take ona life of their own, become detached from humansocial relations, and seemingly dominate their cre-ators. Marx describes this process as commodityfetishism. Through the related concepts of alienationand commodity fetishism, social relations are conceivedas relations between things, which is the process ofreification.

In contrast, Weber believed that Marx had erred.According to him, alienation is the result of bureau-cracy and the rationalization of social life that comeswith modernity. Workers become alienated whenthey sacrifice personal desires for those of a largergroup. Losing control of the means of production ismerely a consequence of large-scale rational pro-duction. Hence, because workers cut themselves offfrom their individual goals, they are necessarilyalienated.

In general, anthropological treatments of alien-ation and the related concept of commodity fetishismhave held sway over the Weberian conceptualiza-tion, in part because power relations between work-ers and capitalists are not recognized and, in addition,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALIENATION 51

because it does not acknowledge the seemingindependence of commodities from their producers.For instance, anthropological research on the pene-tration of capitalist economies, in which moneyreplaces local forms of exchange, has shown thatcommodities and money itself are perceived to attainmystical power.

Although the object of most anthropologicalresearch related to alienation has been on the effectsof modernization or capitalism on non-Western tribaland peasant societies, recently anthropologists haveapplied the concept to the effects capitalism has onWestern societies. The international adoption marketestranges individuals from reproduction through thecommodification of children. Online or cyberspacecommunities, where individuals communicate acrossvast distances, alienate individuals because they loseface-to-face contact with their peers and cease toregard them as fellow material beings.

As extensive as commodification has become,where all social relations are reduced to capitalisticmarket exchange, not all individuals have becomealienated from their community, history, and meansof production. Ethnic tourism research on craftreproduction has shown the opposite to happen,where the commodification of traditional handicraftsand practices have revitalized local culture and cre-ated niches within late-capitalist society to stay con-nected to core cultural values. In other words, thesepeople are not alienated from the products they pro-duce or from their history or community and familyby the intense commodification of everything in thecontemporary world.

— Walter E. Little

See also Marxism; Political Economy

Further Readings

Marx, K. (1973). Grundrisse: Foundations of thecritique of political economy (Rough draft,M. Nicolaus, Trans). London: Penguin Books.(Original work published 1939)

Marx, K. (1976). Capital: A critique of politicaleconomy. New York: New Left Review Press.(Original work published 1867)

Taussig, M. (1980). The devil and commodity fetishismin South America. Chapel Hill: University of NorthCarolina Press.

ALIENATION

Within the field of sociocultural anthropology, thosewho study human behavior have devoted a gooddeal of attention to understanding the impact ofalienation on individuals and society. Since theterrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, a numberof scholars have turned their attention to trying toexplain the growing alienation among youngIslamic youths and its impact on terrorism.Alienation has played a major part in expandingthe belief that any actions taken for thefundamentalist cause are justified and, therefore,approved by Allah. The target for this extremisthatred of all non-Muslims has been primarily anti-Western and particularly anti-American in nature.By definition, radicalism calls for extreme actionstaken outside of the political system; therefore, thisnew generation of Islamic youths has been taughtthat traditional political actions are of no use toadherents of Islam because the democratic systemhas failed to meet their needs in the past.

Studies of the behavior of Islamic youths sincethe late 1990s have shown that alienated youngpeople have become prime targets for Islamicleaders who have secretly established committedgroups of followers that are willing to die withoutquestion for the cause. It is this kind of dedication,stemming from the belief that dying for the causegrants immediate entry into paradise, that leads tosuicide bombings and other forms of terrorism inwhich the perpetrator has no thought for personalsafety. The lack of caution increases the probabilityof success.

In order to understand why Islamic youth are sovulnerable to fundamentalist radicalism, somescholars have examined changes within the MiddleEast and North Africa that have altered traditionalfamily structures. At the same time that Islamicfamilies have lost influence, alcohol and criminalactivity have increased, contributing to alienationfrom more traditional Islamic values. Western mediahas also played a part in the alienation process byillustrating the difference between Islamic youthand those who live in Western societies.

Some scholars have paid particular attentionto Islamic youths whose families have immigrated

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALTAMIRA CAVE52

4 ALTAMIRA CAVE

Often called the “Sistine Chapel of Paleolithic Art,” theprehistoric Altamira Cave contains paintings andartifacts dating from 18,000 to 13,000 years ago (BP).Located on Monte Vispieres in Cantabria, NorthernSpain, it was first explored in 1879 by Don MarcelinoSanz de Santuola. Early controversy raged over the ageof the site, as many doubted that prehistoric humanscould produce such sophisticated art; however, its sig-nificance was recognized by the early 1900s, andAltamira Cave was listed as a World Heritage Site byUNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific,and Cultural Organization) in 1985.

Altamira Cave consists of an S-shaped series ofrooms with a total length of 270 m (886 feet) andcontains two rich occupation levels. The earlier, datedto the Solutrean (18,500 years BP), contains stonepoints, bone awls, and pendants. The second, dated tothe Magdalenian (15,500–14,500 years BP), contains

antler and bone points and leatherworking tools.Altamira is unusual because it contains both domes-tic artifacts and cave paintings; most cave art islocated far from living areas.

Engraved and painted on the ceiling of the cave areimages of wild animals such as bison, deer, horses,and wild boar; outlines of human hands; and abstractfigures and shapes. Sometimes drawings are superim-posed on earlier works. Bison are the most commonanimal depicted.

These Paleolithic artists were skilled at paintingimages on the ceiling that would accurately reflect theproportions of the animal as seen from the cave floor.The images at Altamira were painted in red, brown,yellow, and black pigments. The use of several colorsallowed for subtle shadings and perspectives. Thenaturally rough texture of the walls was used to depictmovement and a three-dimensional perspective forthe viewer below. These details reflect a significantlevel of technical skill. On seeing them, Picassoreportedly exclaimed, “After Altamira, all is deca-dence.” Indeed, many artists of the modern artmovement claimed inspiration from Paleolithic cavepaintings.

Creating these works of art required a considerableexpenditure of effort. The artists needed scaffoldingto reach the vaulted ceilings. Light must have beenprovided (and raised to the ceiling) via torches orbowls filled with animal fat. The four colors of pig-ment were produced by mixing ochre and manganesewith a binder, such as blood or urine. The pigmentwas then applied with a brush or by blowing it onto asurface with a pipe or by mouth.

Why did our ancestors invest so much energy in caveart? While the thoughts of these artists will neverbe known, anthropologists have developed severalhypotheses to explain why these paintings were created.Perhaps the artists performed sympathetic magic byritually capturing the animal’s soul prior to the hunt,improving their success. The images could representhunting trophies or tell stories. Many of the nonanimalsymbols seen in cave art have been interpreted asrepresentations of male and female genitalia; maybe theart signals fertility magic, influencing future births.Some feel that many of the symbols are astronomicalor calendrical, and used to mark seasons. Possibly,the images were created for aesthetic or nonpracticalreasons. Like all art, the social context in which thesepaintings were made holds the key to what madethese images meaningful to the artists and their

to Europe, where the youths have failed tobecome integrated into Western society. Forinstance, in Great Britain, the Islamic populationhas more than doubled in recent years. Severalpolls of Arab youth have found almost half ofthem willing to fight for Osama bin Laden butunwilling to bear arms for Great Britain. Britishsecurity personnel are aware that several thousandIslamic youth traveled from Britain to Afghanistanduring the 1990s to receive religious indoctrinationand to be trained as terrorists. Records show thatother European nationalities are also representedamong those incarcerated as suspected terroristsat the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo Bay,Cuba.

Scholars who study the connection between thealienation experienced by young Islamic youths andterrorism believe the only way to end the threat tointernational peace is by identifying and dealingwith the underlying causes of alienation that havecreated a fertile environment for Islamicfundamentalism and its insistence on radicalism,separatism, and terrorism.

— Elizabeth Purdy

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALTRUISM 53

contemporaries. In any case, the beauty of thesePaleolithic paintings is unforgettable.

— Cathy Willermet

See also Cave Art; Petroglyphs; Rock Art

Further Readings

Bahn, P., & Vertut, J. (2001). Journey through the IceAge. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Saura Ramos, P. A. (1999). Cave of Altamira.New York: Harry N. Abrams.

Servicio de Información Turística de Cantabria.History and art: Caves. http://www.turcantabria.com/Datos/Historia-Arte/cuevas-i.htm

4 ALTRUISM

Altruism is the attitude that consists of according one’sregards to the Other (alter in Latin), personally or glob-ally, as a principle of one’s choices and actions. Opposedto egoism, it implies sincere and unselfish concern forthe well-being of others, expressed practically.

Its most current use is referred to interhumanrelationships; in this sense, it can be attached tohumanism. Altruism is indeed an extremely signifi-cant notion of great concrete consequences for thehuman societies.

There shouldn’t be confusion betweenthe principle of altruism and the one ofsimple respect of the Other: Being respect-ful doesn’t necessarily imply taking underconsideration the Other’s welfare for thedefinition of one’s behavior.

Another possible erroneous identifica-tion may occur between altruism and theethical attitude founded on the principleof reciprocity, as expressed negativelyalready in the Hebraïc Talmud of Babylon(Shabbat): “Don’t do to your fellow manwhat you would detest he did to you,” andpositively in the Christian New Testament(Luke 5:31; Matthew 7:12): “What youwould like people do for you, do it in thesame way for them.”

Instead of these principles of “reasonablejustice,” Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778)

thought that human actions should rather follow theprinciple of “natural goodness”: “Do your own goodwith the least possible harm for the Other.” However,this isn’t altruism, either: Not to harm is just to respect;no active consideration for the Other’s good is at play.

In fact, we may distinguish two sorts of altruism,to which we are giving here original appellations, forthe sake of more clarity:

1. The “egalitarian” altruism, where one is con-cerned of the well-being of the Other at the same levelone cares about one’s own. This is the commonest wayto conceive altruism. It is expressed paradigmaticallyby the capital Judeo-Christian command, present inthe Old and the New Testament: “Love your neighbor asyou love thyself” (Leviticus 18:18 and Matthew 22:39),as well as in the Islamic Koran: “Help ye one another inrighteousness and piety” (Sourat 5:2).

2. The “absolute” altruism, where one puts theOther’s good at a higher level than one’s own in thescale of the values and principles defining one’sactions. It is a more exceptional manifestation of altru-ism. Usually, it is considered as characterizing the idealparent’s love toward their children. In more rare cir-cumstances, it may be addressed to persons with whichsome other kind of loving relationship occurs (family,lovers, friends) or other larger common link (compa-triots, people sharing the same ideas or beliefs). In thelatter category may belong the “guardians” of the idealRepublic of Plato (428–348 BC), who were asked to put

Source: © Gianni Dagli Orti/CORBIS.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALTRUISM54

aside their personal happiness to occupy themselveswith the welfare of the city, as well as some “nationalheroes” or “martyrs.”

The most astonishing case is the one where noother relationship interferes than the commonhuman status. Such an altruism becomes, for example,the motivation inspiring the actions of persons com-monly called “heroes of humanity” (or even “saints,”if they are attached at the same time to a religiousbelief): One’s own life might be either literally sacri-ficed for the welfare of others or entirely dedicated toit (such as scientists choosing to work lifelong underhard conditions for discoveries that will help theconcrete amelioration of others’ lives, or personsembracing a life deprived of comfort and completelyoriented toward works of charity, the defense of humanrights, or even the Boddhishatvas of the MahayanaBuddhism).

The Other to Which Altruism Is Addressed

Altruism is manifest in interpersonal relations. Wethink that it is appropriate to first develop a littlefurther the crucial notion of the “Other” towardwhom one may behave altruistically.

According to evolutional psychology, the notion of“Other” (or “alterity”) develops progressively for thehuman being as the latter defines more and more thelimits of its own self (its “sameness”).

It is through our relationship with the Other thatwe are able to survive physically in our youngest ageand to learn everything necessary for our psychologi-cal and social growth up to adulthood and till the endof our days. The particular individuality of eachperson is thus formed in constant interaction withthe Other.

The Greek philosophers (6th century BC–6th cen-tury AD), who lived in societies where interpersonaldialogue was a considerable and crucial part of every-day life for private, public and intellectual matters,present the Other as a mirror of our soul. They haveparticularly underlined the importance of the Otherfor the awakening of the self-consciousness and ofself-knowledge. The Greeks in general defined them-selves through an opposition to the other people,called “Barbarians” (this didn’t imply any lack of cul-ture accorded to them; on the contrary, we have manytestimonies that there was a great esteem for the artis-tic and intellectual achievements of the neighboringAsian and Egyptian civilizations, toward which

travels were made for the sake of learning: The termderives from the phonetical “bar-bar,” which was theimpression given of the sound of languages one didn’tunderstand).

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770–1831)places the exceptional moment of the realization ofself-conscience at the meeting with the conscienceof the Other, in a dramatic clash.

For Plato and the Judeo-Christian tradition, theOther is considered moreover as an image of thedivine and therefore should be respected as such.Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) thinks that the respectfor the Other is founded precisely on the fact thatthe Other is a “person,” who should be seen as an “endin itself,” not as a “mean” for something else, like asimple object. The other persons limit our absolutefreedom of action, because they are objects of ourrespect. Thus, the interpersonal relation with theOther also becomes the reason for the foundation ofmoral conduct on the notion of obligation.

A different approach of the way to conceive theOther, that is, as a separate reality and not just asan object of the ego’s conscience, is made by thephenomenologists, for example, Edmund Husserl(1859–1938) and Martin Heidegger (1889–1976).Emmanuel Levinas (1905–1995), who is at the sametime inspired by this school and by Judeo-Christianity,accords a greater importance to the Other than to theSelf, against the “egology” of the previous philosophi-cal theories on the subject. The Other has a meaning byhimself, before the attribution of any meaning to himby ourselves. He comes to us like a revelation by gen-erosity. This “face” to which we can’t escape representsan appeal to responsibility and justice and reveals us toourselves. This philosopher has eminently analyzedabnegation and altruism.

To the antipodes of such a vision stands Jean-PaulSartre (1905–1980), who accepts that the Other’s visionof myself brings up my self-conscience, but the Otherexists only for himself, as liberty. The Other “is an ‘I’that I’m not, which creates nothingness as an elementof definite separation between the Other and myself.”

Is Altruism Natural?

In the interpersonal relation to the Other, is thehuman being naturally inclined to altruism or to ego-ism? This crucial question, from which dependslargely the definition of the most appropriate ethicaltheory, has to be answered according to David Hume

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

ALTRUISM 55

(1711–1776), only after a systematic research onhuman nature, inspired by natural science.

The evolutionist thesis concerning human speciesexpressed by Charles Darwin (1809–1882) has beenused therefore as a foundation for the theoriessupporting as natural moral human thought andconduct, “socialized egoism,” “utilitarianism,” and“hedonism” (man’s natural priority is the pursuit ofwhat is more useful or pleasant for himself, thoughwithout harming the Others).

According to the utilitarians, even altruist behavioris following “egoist strategies” inscribed in the humangenes. Altruism toward others who possess the samegenes (family) or who may also be altruists in returnis the naturally selected optimal way for the survivalof the species. In consequence, moral conduct isn’tthe result of a personal free choice, but of a pro-grammed natural reaction. According to JeremyBentham (1748–1832), the welfare of a whole humancommunity may be calculated and chosen on thebasis of the greatest quantity of good or pleasantthings accompanied by the least possible unpleasantthings that men may expect from a common life.

These theories may arouse, and have aroused, manyobjections, for example: Only material goods are “mea-surable,” but there are many other things that arealso considered as “good” by humans. All members of asociety can’t have the same opinion on what is better forthemselves and the whole of the community. We couldadd here: Even if it is true that altruism in parental andsocial relations is met also in other natural species, thisdoesn’t reduce such a behavior to a natural selection, asthere are in human beings altruistic attitudes that don’tenter this scheme. As for an “altruism” that expects areturn, could it still be called “altruism”?

As a more moderate solution, Adam Smith(1723–1790) accepts also a natural “sympathy” of thehuman being for other humans with whom he is ininterference, in the sense of sharing the others’ passions.

Arthur Schopenhauer (1788–1860) believes,though, that there is more in the feeling of sympathywe have toward the members of our species: On onehand, we don’t like to see the Other suffering, andtherefore we avoid harming them; on the other hand,we take pleasure in doing good to the others.

Before him, Benedictus de Spinoza (1632–1677)had supported that the goodwill toward the Other isin fact a kind of “commiseration,” or pity.

Pity, or the Buddhist “compassion,” or the Christian“charity” (translation of the Greek word agape, which

means “love”), is indeed the source of altruism (onthe condition that it doesn’t hide any feeling of “supe-riority” or of “self-satisfaction” for one’s “goodness”).An excellent description of this quality of unselfishgood will toward the Other is given in the first “Letterto the Corinthians” of St. Paul, in the New Testament.

True friendship (philia in Greek) in its best formis also expressed as an absolute good will, addressedto the Other for what he is as a person, as Aristotle(384–322 BC) notes in his ethical works. The sponta-neous movement of the “self ” toward the otherperson, who is asking to be loved, is called “solici-tude” by Paul Ricoeur (1913–), who places this funda-mental ethical intention before the moral action.

René Descartes (1596–1650), following Plato,underlines that caring for the other’s well-beingwithout any wish for return is the characteristic oflove, clearly distinguishing it from desire, whichincludes an egoistic will for possession.

After all these considerations, we think we mayaffirm that altruism should be considered as naturallycoexisting with egoism in human nature, withoutbeing limited to a simple result of “natural selection.”

But altruism is preferable, even if this may soundlike a paradox, as it is a “plus-nature,” says VladimirJankelevitch (1903–1985). For Emmanuel Levinas,the only way for us to approach the Infinite and toarrive at the highest fulfilment is to submit our “I” tothe “You,” in an absolutely altruistic attitude.

New Contemporary Expressions of Altruism

We would like to conclude here by mentioningthat during the last half of the 20th century, newexpressions of altruism emerged. As communicationsand means of transfer have greatly developed, newsabout victims of natural disasters, diseases, transgres-sions of human rights, or armed conflicts travelaround the globe quickly. We remark that many asso-ciations or individuals around the world show a greatsensibility and eagerness to assist, in various ways,their fellow humans in need. We might call thesealtruistic attitudes at a global level concrete manifes-tations of a “universal altruism”—an unexpectedaspect of the actual phenomenon of “globalization”and a supplementary argument for the innate altru-ism of the human species and its surprising greatness.

— Aikaterini Lefka

See also Civil Disobedience; Critical Realism

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA56

Further Readings

Hume, D. (2000). A treatise on human nature: Beingan attempt to introduce the experimental methodof reasoning into moral subjects (D. F. Norton &M. J. Norton, Eds.). Oxford/New York: OxfordUniversity Press. (Original work published1739–1740)

Ricoeur, P. (1992). Oneself as another (K. Blamey,Trans.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Smith, A. (1984). The Glasgow edition of the works andcorrespondence of Adam Smith: Vol. I. The theory ofmoral sentiments. Glasgow: Liberty Fund. (Originalwork published 1759)

4 AMAZONIA

Amazonia. The name conjures western images ofluxuriant vegetation, unbridled nature, and vast,unexplored lands. Whether envisioned as a tropicalparadise or a “green hell,” the salience of the naturalis-tic and idealistic features associated with Amazoniahas implications for the perception of its humaninhabitants. From its inception, Amazonian anthro-pology has been a highly contested and fracturedintellectual field, partly resulting from the manner inwhich Amazonia was imagined as a cultural categoryof colonialism centuries before the advent of modernethnographic exploration.

Early European encounters with indigenousAmazonians provoked debates about the nature ofhumanity in a manner that would inform subsequentcenturies of colonial rule. Yet we can distinguishAmazonia from other colonized regions partly by themanner in which its native peoples were character-ized as the prototypical primitive people. Long beforeethnographic investigations of Amazonian societies,Westerners stereotyped Amazonians as savages, nobleor otherwise, and considered them to be outside thedomain of (Western) civilization and closer to nature.

The beginnings of anthropological investigation inthe region remained infused with inherited stereo-types about the nature and culture of Amazonia.Ethnographic studies appeared relatively late in theregion, which was still largely unexplored scientifi-cally well into the 20th century. The diversity ofsocieties encountered over five centuries of contacthas contributed to the mosaic character of region, in

which diversity itself remains an important hallmark,frustrating attempts at regional synthesis. The firstregional synthesis provided in 1948 by Julian Stewardin the Handbook of South American Indians inheritedmany of the presumptions of earlier periods. Revisionsof the standard model provided by Steward have pre-dominated the past few decades of Amazonian anthro-pology, during which time ethnographic studies ofAmazonian peoples reached unprecedented growth.The search for a new synthesis in Amazonian anthro-pology remains an important goal in the field, yet isfurther complicated by the increasingly abundant andvaried literature regarding Amazonia.

Geographic Definition

Amazonia as a geographic region is named for itsmajor river, the Amazon, the world’s largest river bywater volume. The term Amazon refers to the femalewarriors of Greek mythology, who were associatedwith fabulous accounts of indigenous warriors alongthe banks of the named river. The river’s headwatersare located in the Andean mountains, and the princi-pal channel drains east into the Atlantic Ocean. TheAmazon River is approximately the same length—6,400–6,800 kilometers—as the Nile and, due toyearly changes in the meandering channel, carries afluctuating status as the world’s longest river. Manytributaries of the Amazon also rank among theworld’s longest rivers and constitute an integral partof the region. In the strict sense of the term,Amazonia refers to the watershed of the AmazonRiver and its many tributaries.

Occupying approximately seven million squarekilometers, roughly the size of the continental UnitedStates, the Amazon Basin is the largest river basin inthe world. This vast region dominates the northernportion of the South American continent and con-tains the world’s most extensive tract of humidtropics. Bounded to the north by the Orinoco Riverbasin and to the south by the Brazilian shield escarp-ment, the Amazon Basin stretches eastward fromthe lower slopes of the Andes, where the 500 meterelevation contour is generally used to delimit theAmazon as a phytogeographic region. Over half ofthe basin encompasses two ancient upland shields,the Guiana Shield to the north of the river and theBrazilian Shield to the south, both of which predatethe rise of the Andes. Remaining areas comprise agiant alluvial basin.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA 57

Several adjacent areas are not geographicallypart of the Amazon Basin but are considered part ofgreater Amazonia because they share many of itsecological and cultural features. These include theregion to the southeast that is sometimes referred toas pre-Amazonia and incorporates the Araguaia andTocantins River basins that drain into the Atlanticsouth of the mouth of the Amazon. The Orinoco RiverBasin, which drains north into the Caribbean, is alsogenerally included in the definition of Amazonia, asare the tropical forested regions of the Guianas.Finally, the transition between the Central BrazilianHighlands and the Amazon Basin is gradual andincludes the upper portions of the Xingú, Araguaia,and Tocantins Rivers.

We can also use the term Amazonia to mean thepolitically and economically defined boundariesmaintained by contemporary nation states. Countrieswhose borders include portions of Amazonia includeBrazil, French Guiana, Suriname, Guyana, Venezuela,Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia. As a result ofhistorical geopolitical expansion in the region, morethan two thirds of the Amazon Basin falls withinBrazil’s contemporary jurisdiction and generallyreceives proportionately more popular and scientificattention. The Andean nations of Bolivia, Peru,Ecuador, and Colombia also have sizeable portionsof the Amazon Basin relative to country size. Eventhe smaller portions of Amazonia located withinVenezuela and the Guianas have played an importantrole in the exploration of the region’s biological andcultural diversity.

The Amazonian Environment

The environment is an important defining character-istic of Amazonia, and, as such, has figured promi-nently in anthropological accounts of the region. Inparticular, archaeologist Betty Meggers presented theAmazonian environment as a “counterfeit paradise,”in which lush tropical flora is a deceptive indicator ofunderlying soil fertility because energy in tropicalforests is recycled within the canopy structure of theforests rather than stored in the soil substrate. Theability of Amazonian soils and environments to sup-port the development of complex societies emergedas a central debate in Amazonian ethnography andarchaeology. These debates are grounded in assump-tions of the Amazonian environment as pristine,static, nonproductive, and fundamentally limiting in

its effect on indigenous societies. Recent advancesin our understanding of the nature and culture ofAmazonian environments are therefore relevant toAmazonian anthropology.

Located in the humid tropics, the Amazon isdefined by tropical conditions that include year-round warm temperatures, high amounts of solarradiation, rainfall, humidity, and biodiversity.Tropical rainforests cover the majority of the AmazonBasin, which contains the largest expanse of theworld’s rainforests. Yet, while Amazonia may havecome to symbolize the generic tropical forest—hot,humid, and teeming with vegetation—the region isfar from homogonous. Biodiversity, an importanthallmark of the Amazon, generally increases fromeast to west and is correlated with multiple factorssuch as latitude, rainfall, temperature, solar radiation,and soils that likewise vary across the region. Whilethe Pleistocene refugia theory was once advanced asan explanation for the rich diversity of Amazonianflora, ecologists now suggest that a variety of naturaldisturbance processes, rather than long-term climaticstability, underlie speciation.

Another important advance in the scientificunderstanding of the Amazonian environment hasbeen the documentation of the variety of ecosystemsthat characterize Amazonia. At the most basic level, adistinction can be made between the upland regions,or terra firme, and the floodplains of the major rivers,called the várzea. The várzea accounts for approxi-mately 2% of the Amazon Basin, yet is considered dis-proportionately important to Amazonian societiesbecause of the relatively rich alluvial soils. The várzeacan be internally differentiated into three differenthabitats: the upper floodplain, the lower floodplain,and the estuary.

We can categorize Amazonian rivers into three maintypes that have important ecological impacts: white-water rivers, clearwater rivers, and blackwater rivers.Whitewater rivers drain the eastern slopes of the Andesand carry geologically young sediments of high fertilitythat are deposited downstream during seasonal flood-ing events. These floods constitute the higher soil fertil-ity found along the várzea floodplains of the AmazonRiver and its whitewater tributaries. In contrast, clear-water rivers drain the ancient leached bedrocks of theGuiana and Brazilian plateaus and therefore carry sed-iment loads of medium to low fertility. Blackwaterrivers drain the white sandy soils of the northwestAmazon that are nutrient poor and extremely acidic.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA58

Historical documents and archaeological evidencesuggest that densely populated settlements oncespanned the várzea regions—fostering ongoingdebate over the nature of prehistoric and historicchiefdoms in the Amazon. The majority of contem-porary indigenous societies, however, live within theupland regions of the Amazon. Emilio Moran’s 1993book Through Amazonian Eyes: The Human Ecologyof Amazonian Populations carefully documents theinternal variety of ecosystems in both the várzea andterra firme in an attempt to reach beyond this simpledichotomy and avoid condensing diverse habitats andsocieties under the generic rubric of “tropical forestadaptations.” Moran describes the diversity of habi-tats within the terra firme, including lowland savan-nas, blackwater ecosystems, montaine forests, andupland forests, each of which is internally differenti-ated. Upland forests also exhibit what appear to beanthropogenic forest types, including liana, bamboo,Brazil nut, and certain palm forests.

Recent advances in ecological research challengeassumptions that Amazonian habitats are homeo-static or stable and increasingly recognize the dynamicrole of human societies in the formation of anthro-pogenic environments. In addition to the large-scalelandscape modifications produced by dense popula-tions of the past, traditional subsistence activitiespracticed by contemporary indigenous societies like-wise interact with and transform local ecosystems.Slash-and-burn horticulture efficiently converts trop-ical forest biomass and mimics processes of naturalforest gap dynamics. The primary staple throughoutmuch of the Amazon is manioc (Manihot esculenta),along with maize, bananas, plantains, papaya, sweetpotatoes or yams, and beans. Cultigens are ofteninterspersed to create multistoried swiddens or gar-den plots that, rather than being abruptly abandoned,are generally managed through succession. Old fal-lows function as agroforestry systems that may beused as the preferred hunting and gathering locationsfor many years. Anthropogenic forests that regeneratefrom old fallows may be just as biodiverse, if not moreso, than adjacent old growth forests, as documentedby William Balée among the Ka’apor.

Horticultural activities are generally complementedby hunting, fishing, and gathering activities. Amazonialacks large pack animals, and game animals tend to bedispersed and cryptic. Hunting technologies such asblow darts, poisons, bows and arrows, and traps areemployed and often embedded in local knowledge

systems and cosmologies that stress the relationshipsbetween people and animals. Likewise, fishing activi-ties use technologies such as nets, hooks, weirs, andfish poisons, and the catch provides important sourcesof protein. Finally, the gathering of wild and semido-mesticated plants, particularly palms, is an importantcomplementary activity that affects the diversity anddistribution of these resources. Even still, the assump-tion that Amazonian environments are uniformly pooror that indigenous people have passively adapted topristine environmental conditions once formed a partof the traditional definition of Amazonia.

Amazonia as a Culture Region

Definitions of Amazonia as a culture region haveincluded implicit comparisons with other cultureregions of South America, particularly the Andes.Early ethnographers sought to explain why theimpressive state-level societies of the Andean regionwere not found in the adjacent tropical lowlands,where the ethnographic present was characterized bynumerous small, autonomous horticultural or hunt-ing-gathering tribes. Steward classified these groupsrespectively as Tropical Forest Tribes (swidden horti-culturalists) and Marginals (hunter-gatherers) in theHandbook of South American Indians. Assumptionsunderlying cultural evolutionary typologies led to thesearch for conditions that prevented the developmentof complex societies in the Amazon. The environ-ment was initially explored as a likely culprit. Thecharacterization of Amazonia in terms of negativerather than positive traits has had a lasting impact onthe anthropology of the region.

In positive terms, Amazonia is typified by its culturaland linguistic diversity, which makes regional general-izations difficult. The traditional unit of analysiswithin the region has been the tribe. The exact numberof tribes or ethnic groups in the Amazon region isalso difficult to estimate given the uncertain overlapbetween local and supralocal units of identification orthat between language and ethnicity. Furthermore,ongoing processes of acculturation and ethnogenesisdefy analysis of tribes as static, ahistorical units.

However defined, we usually classify tribal groupsaccording to their subsistence strategies as hunter-gatherers, trekkers, or horticulturalists. While heuris-tic, this typology arbitrarily divides a continuum ofnomadic and sedentary lifestyles and usually negateshistorical or contemporary inclusion in market

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA 59

economies. Mixed subsis-tence strategies that combinesome form of slash-and-burn horticulture withhunting, fishing, and gath-ering are most commonthroughout the region. Wealso traditionally charac-terize Amazonian tribes byautonomous villages, rela-tively small populations, anddifferent degrees of egalitari-anism. Other region-widecharacteristics include theimportance of reciprocity,ostracism as a form of socialcontrol, the existence offood taboos, belief in mul-tiple souls, and shaman-ism. Peter Rivière suggeststhat dualism is a universal structural feature ofAmazonian societies, including underlying two-section kinship terminologies, moieties, and a princi-ple of direct exchange.

Linguistic Diversity and Language Groupings

Amazonia is also recognized as a linguistic area, withshared pan-Amazonian linguistic tendencies that dif-ferentiate the languages of the Amazon from those ofthe Andes. Unfortunately, the Amazon basin remainsthe least known linguistic region in the world, with apaucity of adequate grammars in relation to the diver-sity of languages evident. Furthermore, processes ofassimilation and language loss continue to accelerateat an alarming rate. There are more than 300 extantindigenous Amazonian languages that belong toapproximately 20 language families, and include overa dozen linguistic isolates.

The largest language families in terms of numbersof affiliated languages include Arawakan, Cariban,Tupian, Macro-Gê, Pano-Takanan, and Tucanoan.The major language families are also noted for theirmarkedly discontinuous distributions, more so thanin any other part of the world. The Tupi and Arawakfamilies are the most dispersed, followed by the Cariblanguages. Other language families are more local-ized, including Panoan and Jivaroan languages in themontaña, Gê languages in Central Brazil, andTucanoan languages in the Northwest.

Distinctive regional distributions and associatedcharacteristics allow language groups to functionas meaningful categories for organizing and com-paring Amazonian societies. Languages are closelyrelated to ethnic identity in the Amazon, and lan-guage families provide analytical units that allow forregional comparisons. Amazonian scholars oftenspecialize as much according to language families asthey do to geographic regions, and research direc-tions and analysis are often informed by the differ-ent cultural regularities affiliated with these majorgroupings.

With the largest number of languages and a widedistribution, the Arawak family has been the focusof a substantial degree of scholarly research. Publishedin 2002, the edited volume Comparative ArawakanHistories by Jonathan Hill and Fernando Santos-Granero incorporates much of this research anddemonstrates how linguistic groupings can providea basis for meaningful dialogue and regional synthe-sis. Throughout their vast, fragmented distribution,Arawak-speaking groups are noted for their culturalproclivity to trade, forge alliances, and maintainwidely dispersed fields of identification. As such,Arawak groups are implicated in the maintenanceof contemporary and historical trade networks inAmazonia. According to Arawak scholars, culturalinstitutions that emphasize peaceful relationshipswith other Arawak groups enable them to integratelarger areas into such networks.

Source: © iStockphoto/Ana Pinto.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA60

Cultural peculiarities of Arawak speakers includea diplomatic ethos, a prohibition of internal warfarecodified in ritual greetings, and a characteristicwillingness to incorporate other ethnic groups intoArawak communities. Even the kinship system ofriverine Arawak groups extends classificatory siblingsto encourage the establishment of allies beyondimmediate kin. Apart from Arawak and Tukanoangroups, preoccupation with genealogy and extendedkin categories are rare among Amazonian societiesand are connected to the equally uncommon empha-sis on social stratification and the ambition to incor-porate, rather than confront, neighboring groups.

The Arawak phenomenon refers to the pervasivepresence of Arawak groups throughout Amazoniathat resulted from the hypothesized expansion out ofthe Orinoco and Rio Negro heartland during thesecond millennium BC. The distribution of Arawaklanguages suggests a pattern of expansion alongmajor rivers, creating wedges that contributed to thegeographic demarcation of more localized languagefamilies. Arawak cultural institutions, along withexpertise in river navigation, trade, intensive agricul-ture, and hierarchical social organizations may haveplayed a role in the emergence of a regional tradesystem in prehistoric Amazonia that emerged at thistime. With access to fertile floodplains and majorriverine trade routes, Arawakan societies may havebeen the most powerful and expansive polities inpre-Colombian Amazonia.

Studies of Tupi language families, particularlythe Tupi-Guarani groups, likewise contribute to anunderstanding of historical processes in the region. Inapparent contrast to the Arawak expansion throughtrade and incorporation, Tupi societies appear tohave expanded through military conquest. Tupisocieties originally migrated eastward from thesouthwestern Amazon to conquer vast territoriessouth of the Amazon and southeastern Brazil. Thefamous Tupinambá chiefdom displaced Gê speakersalong the Atlantic coast shortly prior to Europeanarrival. A westward expansion was underway whenthe Europeans arrived in the 16th century, by whichtime Tupi societies controlled the southern shore ofcentral and lower Amazon. Orellana’s 1542 expedi-tion encountered the powerful Omagua chiefdom inthe upper Amazon, lending historical evidence to theexistence of complex societies along the major tribu-taries. Archaeologist Michael Heckenberger suggests,however, that the Omagua may have been formerly

Arawak-speakers who had recently adopted a Tupilexicon, demonstrating the complex relationshipsbetween language and ethnicity in the region.

Although located outside of Amazonia, theprominence of the Tupinambá in the 16th centurycemented their place in the Brazilian national her-itage. The Tupinambá remain a point of reference forthe interpretation of contemporary Tupi-Guaranisocieties in Amazonia, which are smaller horticulturalor foraging groups, generally “regressed” horticultur-alists. Furthermore, the major trade language orlingua geral of the Amazon evolved on the east coast ofBrazil and combined a simplified morphology fromthe Tupinambá language with a syntax similar toPortuguese. The lingual geral spread up the Amazonbasin, producing dialectical variants, some of whichare still spoken in the Upper Rio Negro region.

Tupi-Guarani groups have received particularattention for their reputations as cannibals and theirhistory of migrations throughout the region. Contem-porary ethnographies continue to explore theseenduring themes, demonstrating how they involvediverse aspects of culture such as subsistence, warfare,kinship, and cosmology. Although diverse, Tupi-Guarani societies tend to use Dravidian kinship ter-minologies and have oblique marriage rules. In otherrespects, however, Tupi-Guarani groups are morenotable for their cultural diversity—a fact that haslong frustrated comparative scholarly efforts.

In contrast to the loosely defined cultural similari-ties of the Tupi-Guaraní, we typify the Gê groups ofcentral Brazil by strongly dualistic social structuresthat helped inspire the emergence of structuralanthropology in the 1950s and 1960s. The Gê groupsare most commonly associated with the seasonallydry closed savannas (cerrado) of Central Brazil, butare also found in the bordering closed-canopy forestsof the lower Amazon and pre-Amazonia. Althoughthe landscape was traditionally considered onlymarginally productive, the Gê groups maintained anabundant existence with occasionally dense popula-tions through complementary strategies of limitedagriculture and nomadism. Most contemporary Gêgroups have reduced or stopped trekking altogetheras a result of circumscription by cattle ranchers andindustrial soy farmers.

The earliest scholars failed to recognize the com-plex social structures of the Gê groups, assumingfrom Steward’s classification of them as generichunter-gatherers that their societies and technologies

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA 61

should be equally simple. Later scholars discoveredthat the Gê groups were neither pure hunter-gatherersnor socially simple. Rather, they were historicallysemi-nomadic trekkers with seasonal reliance on agri-culture and highly developed social configurations.Striking among these groups is the prevalence ofmen’s houses, cross-cutting moieties, and hierarchicalage grades, which ensured from the start that analysisof social structure would dominate Gê studies.

Major Culture Regions

We can also subdivide Amazonia into the followingcultural regions, each with its own distinctive charac-teristics: the northwest Amazon, northern Amazonia,Guianas, Montaña, Upper Amazon, Lower Amazon,Upper Xingú, and Central Brazil. Regional focuseshave developed within the scholarship of the regionand are informed by the particular characteristics ofeach culture area.

The northwest Amazon is exemplary of regionalinteractions. Unique blackwater ecosystems andcaatinga vegetation mark the ecological distinctive-ness of this region, which is characterized by anincredible diversity of bittern manioc cultivars.Geographically, the region extends from the RioNegro westward into Colombia and Venezuela. TheVaupés and Içana river basins constitute a well-defined linguistic area with a number of characteris-tics shared among groups pertaining to the Arawak,Tukanoan, and Makú language families. Relationshipsbetween language and culture are particularly com-plex in this area. We can find material, social, and ide-ological commonalities among the diverse indigenousgroups of the northwest Amazon, where bonds ofkinship, marriage, and political alliances regularlycross linguistic boundaries.

Multilingualism and linguistic exogamy are charac-teristic of many groups of the region, as are specializedtrade, complex cosmologies, and the shamanic useof hallucinogens. Linguistic exogamy is compulsoryamong East Tukano groups and Tariana in the Vaupés,where marriage practices emphasize nonendogamyrather than prescribed marriages. In these systems,language identity is assigned through patrilinealdescent. Individuals also tend to know several otherregional languages, including those of their mothersand spouses.

Specialized trade also unifies local groups in aregional trade network. Jean Jackson suggested the

term artificial scarcity to define how groups “forget”to make or obtain items that other groups provide.Subsequent specialization reinforces peaceful rela-tions in the region. Janet Chernela likewise concludedthat the northwest Amazonian trade network is struc-tured around the maintenance of social relations.Language and artifact manufacture are the mostsalient identifying features of northwest Amazoniangroups. As such, locally manufactured goods alwaysmove toward “outsiders” and away from relatives. Aparticular form of specialized trade has developedbetween the horticultural tribes and the foragingMakú tribes, in which the Makú peoples providegame, weapons, and hallucinogenic plants in exchangefor manioc and other garden products.

The existence of complex segmentary hierarchiesamong the Tukano groups also distinguishes thisregion. Local descent groups comprised of severalnuclear families are organized into ranked sibs or cor-porate patrilineal descent groups. Sib ranking is basedon prestige and used to allocate preferential territoriesalong rivers. Lower-ranking sibs may be comprisedof individuals who originally spoke non-Tucanoanlanguages such as Makú. The language group, or tribe,functions as a named political and ceremonial group,with all language groups belonging to one of fivephratries that serve as unnamed exogamous groups.

Northern Amazonia is delimited by the Orinoco-Rio Branco area located near the Brazil-Venezuela-Guyana border. Despite the diverse languages groupsfrom the Yanomaman, Arawakan, and Cariban lan-guage families, Galvão defined this culture area asexhibiting remarkable cultural homogeneity. Perhapsthe most well-known Amazonian tribe, the Yanomami,was popularized by the work of Napoleon Chagnonand has come to form one of the foundationalsocieties of the anthropological corpus.

In the adjacent Guianas, Cariban groups historicallydominated the region, while Arawakan societies arepresumed to represent more recent intrusions. In keep-ing with the cultural propensities of Arawakan societies,extensive trade networks once connected the savannasof Venezuela with the Guianas. Unlike the northwesternAmazonian trade network, with its focus on intergrouprelations, the trade system of the Guianas distributesnatural and cultural resources such as curare, pottery,dogs, and green stones. The symbolic systems of Guianagroups have played an important role in the develop-ment of British social anthropology in Amazonia,particularly through the work of Peter Rivière.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA62

Marking the ecological and cultural transitionbetween the Andes and the Amazon, the montañaregion is characterized by specious forests that sup-port complex swidden horticultural systems and sub-sistence economies that stress the importance ofhunting. Bitter manioc is absent from the montaña,although sweet varieties (yucca) are present. The areais populated by numerous localized language families,such as Panoan and Jivaroan, as well as many linguisticisolates. The montaña region serves an ethnic interfacebetween the different tribes of the Andean foothillsand Upper Amazon and has long been involved intrade and cultural interaction between the Andes andthe Amazon. The presence of jungle Quichua, a dialectof Quechua, is emblematic of these interactions.

Montaña groups such as the Jívaroan or Shuarapeoples are most notorious for their practice of head-hunting and have received much scholarly and popu-lar attention. Instead of villages or communal houses,single-family dwellings and residential atomismdefine traditional settlement patterns in the region.Polygynous households that function as autonomousunits may be organized into supralocal units thatdefine an endogamous nexus. Marked gender divisionof labor and a system of resource allocation based onsocial categories of descent and affinity are commonto indigenous peoples of the montaña. Basic conceptsof symmetrical, delayed reciprocity define relation-ships within and across ethnic boundaries, includingexchange of goods, help, refuge, and marriage part-ners. This concept permeates the worldviews andcosmologies of montaña peoples, whose systems ofshamanic practices and hallucinogenic visions havebeen well studied. Shamanism may even play animportant role in the extensive trade networks thatare based, in part, on a system of craft specialization.

The adjacent Upper Amazonian region shares cer-tain characteristics with the montaña, particularly thepredominance of Panoan groups and the absence ofbitter manioc. The contemporary city of Manausmarks the transition between the Upper Amazon andthe Lower Amazon regions. The Lower Amazon,which extends to the river mouth, is characterized bythe importance of bitter manioc cultivation and theuniversality of pottery.

Further to the south, the characteristics of theUpper Xingú river basin include remarkable linguis-tic diversity within a unified cultural area, where lan-guage serves as a group’s main symbolic distinctivefeature. This well-studied region is home to seventeen

indigenous groups that belong to five languagefamilies: Arawak, Carib, Tupi, Gê, and Trumai, a lin-guistic isolate. Ten of these indigenous groups havelived in the region for more than one hundred years,while the remaining tribes were relocated after thecreation of the Xingú National Park in 1961. A seriesof rapids separating the navigable lower Xingú Riverfrom the upper basin allowed this region to serve as arefuge area.

Shared cultural features include dependency onfish for protein and taboos on eating many large gameanimals. People eat only fish, birds, and monkeys andcomplement swidden horticultural practices. Further-more, archaeological remains in the upper Xingú sug-gest that the circular village layout of contemporarysettlements represents cultural continuity with largesedentary settlements of the past. A typical villageincludes haystack-shaped houses circularly arrangedaround a central plaza and the inclusion of men’shouses. Individual households represent patrilinealextended families. Although there is a tendencytoward village endogamy, intermarriage among dif-ferent groups occurs and leads to multilingualism.Intertribal connections also are maintained throughceremonial events that include ceremonial ambas-sadors and a common song language, intertribal gamessuch as spear-throwing and log racing, and specializedceremonial trade. Jackson’s concept of artificial scarcityhas been applied to the intertribal exchange network ofthe Xingú region, in which each group specializes indifferent ceremonial or functional items.

In contrast to the linguistic diversity of the Xingúregion, Central Brazil is characterized by the predom-inance of Gê-speaking groups and associated culturalfeatures, such as circular settlements, men’s houses,moieties, age grades, uxorial residence with brideservice, sharp divisions of labor by gender, pervasivedualism, wrestling matches, strong leaders, and semi-nomadism. Scholarship with a culture area focus(Central Brazil) and a linguistic group focus (Gêsocieties) therefore overlap in these and otherAmazonian regions in ways that are meaningful to anunderstanding of Amazonian anthropology.

History of Amazonia

Amazonia has a long and complex history that beganwell before the arrival of Europeans in the 16th century.Conceptualizations of Amazonians as representinggeneric stages of cultural evolution long prevented an

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA 63

appreciation of the role of historical processes.Furthermore, these stereotypes led to a failure torecognize the past regional scale and supraethniccharacter of Amazonian societies at the time ofEuropean contact. Current interest in the history andhistoriography of the Amazon is beginning to fleshout a more complicated past.

The first inhabitants of Amazonia arrived veryearly, as evidenced by sites such as Pedra Pintada(11,000 BP), roughly contemporaneous with Clovissites in North America. Contrary to North Americanpatterns, Amazonian Paleo-Indians seem to havepracticed a generalized hunter-gatherer strategy thatfocused on hunting small game, fishing, and collect-ing shellfish and forest products rather than biggame, which is lacking in the Amazon.

There is ongoing academic tension between thenotion that egalitarianism and social simplicity typifyAmazonia and the idea that Amazonia is character-ized by a greater range of social systems that devel-oped over time, including societies with elaboratedhierarchies and social complexity. This tension isespecially apparent in archeology due to its greaterattention to prehistoric cultures. Archaeological siteson Marajó Island at the mouth of the Amazon dateback to 950 BC, with the emergence of Marajoarachiefdoms between AD 600 and 1000. ArchaeologistBetty Meggers, however, suggests that the culturalcomplexity of these sites was ephemeral due to envi-ronmental limitations and may even have resultedfrom Andean intrusions.

Other archaeologists working in Amazonia rejectthis claim and continue to excavate archeological sitesin far-flung locations, such as the Orinoco riverdrainage, middle Amazon, the Upper Xingú, andllanos de Mojos in eastern Bolivia—which attest to theemergence of densely populated settlements andregional interactions systems by around AD 1000. Inaddition to mound sites located in the várzea, exten-sive earthworks in the llanos de Mojos of easternBolivia suggest that wet savannas were likewise usedfor intensive agriculture and habitation. Earthen fea-tures such as moats, bridges, and causeways connect-ing ancient settlements in the Upper Xingú alsodocument the emergence of complex societies alongthe southern periphery of the Amazon. Evidence forsociocultural complexity in the Amazon includes theappearance of dark anthrosols, or terra preta, thatindicate past activities of large, sedentary settlements.The extremely high fertility of these soils makes them

desirable by contemporary Amazonian peoples forthe location of agricultural activities.

The earliest historical reports by 16th centuryEuropean explorers corroborate the existence ofdense settlements along the banks of the Amazon.For instance, Orellana’s 1542 expedition down theAmazon documented huge, densely populatedvillages of the Omágua chiefdoms located along a700 kilometer stretch of the river. Other historicallyrecorded chiefdoms include the Lokono uplandpolity straddling the Amazon and Orinoco drainages,and the Aparia, Aisuari, and Yurimaguas. EarlyEuropean chroniclers such as Pedro Teixeira (Acuña),Carvajal, Oveido, and Raleigh documented abundantnatural resources, sophisticated productive tech-nologies, demographic density, social stratification,centralized political power, political provinces, andinterethnic economic relations, including specializedtrade in elite items. These chroniclers also began torecord the depopulation and disarticulation of Indiansocieties that occurred with the demographic collapsebrought about by European diseases.

With the discovery of Brazil in 1500, the Portuguesebegan to explore and colonize the Amazon from theeast, while the Spanish entered the Amazon from theAndean mountains to the west. The Spanish alsocompeted with the Dutch, British, and French forcontrol over the northerly regions of the SouthAmerican continent beginning in the early 17th cen-tury. Initial European interests in Amazonia were eco-nomic and included the search for gold and forestsproducts such as dyes and herbs. The initial impactsof the conquests are scarcely known, although chiefamong them was a devastating population reductiondue to introduced diseases, genocide, and assimila-tion. As indigenous populations fled into the interiorregions or perished, African slaves were brought in tomeet the labor demands of the region. Refugee com-munities of African slaves, quilombos, also were estab-lished in Amazonia and contributed to the culturalheritage of the region. Peoples of African descentmixed with individuals of European and Amazoniandescent in the creation of distinct caboclo societiesthat inhabit the várzea regions.

By the end of the 18th century, after waves ofepidemics, slavery, and colonization, hardly a traceremained of the once populous floodplain chiefdoms.As a result of the extreme demographic collapse,European explorers of the 19th and early 20th centurieswere inclined to perceive Amazonia as the antithesis of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMAZONIA64

culture. Natural scientists, such as Alexander vonHumbolt and Alfred Russell Wallace, encountereddepopulated, autonomous villages assumed to repre-sent primordial rather than historical conditions.Instead, centuries of colonial occupation had alreadyinstigated immeasurable changes in the form of disease,warfare, slavery, religious conversion, language change,and involvement in the boom-and-bust extractiveeconomies that linked the Amazon with the rest of theworld. Postcolonial republics continued policies aimedto integrate and assimilate Amazonia’s diverse societiesand stimulate the economic development of the region.The environmental and social disruption caused bymany of these development schemes has receivedgrowing scholarly and popular attention.

Development of Amazonian Anthropology

Descriptive accounts by amateur ethnographers suchas Curt Ünkel (Nimuendaju) helped pioneer the field ofAmazonian anthropology. German-born Nimuendajubecame the leading Brazilian ethnographer duringthe first half of the 20th century, having lived amongand published extensively about many Tupi-Guaranigroups. His descriptive accounts, along with thosefurnished by other early ethnographers, comprisedthe corpus of materials from which the first regionalsynthesis was drawn. Swiss anthropologist Métrauxand Swedish anthropologist Nordenskiöld, both ofwhom worked in Bolivia, initiated this first synthesis,completed by North American anthropologist JulianSteward after Nordenskiöld passed away. The monu-mental seven volume Handbook of South AmericanIndians (1946–1950) that Steward edited marked thebeginnings of scientific anthropology in the region. Italso established what Eduardo Viveiros de Castro refersto as the standard model of Amazonian ethnography.

The image of indigenous Amazonia that emergedfrom the Handbook became deeply rooted in theethnological tradition of the region. The model com-bines a schema of cultural areas, a typology of levelsof sociocultural integration, and an explanatorytheory of geographic or environmental determinism.Principles of unilineal social evolution are implicitin the organization of the volumes, which dividesindigenous South Americans into foraging marginals,horticultural Tropical Forest Tribes, Circum-Caribbeanchiefdoms, and the Andes. The four defined stages ofunilineal evolution were mapped out across the SouthAmerican continent and correlated with environmental

features that either promoted or limited the develop-ment of societies along this teleological progression.

The Amazon region was defined by the presence oftropical forest tribes, considered to occupy an inter-mediate evolutionary position between the circum-Caribbean chiefdoms and the marginal foragingtribes of Patagonia and Central Brazil. The image pre-sented of the typical tropical forest tribe is familiar—organized into small, autonomous, egalitarian villages;limited by an unproductive environment; and unableto produce the requisite economic surplus to developforms of sociocultural complexity recognized else-where in the continent. Steward’s field of culturalecology proved influential among subsequent decadesof Amazonian ethnographers and archaeologiststhat hotly debated which “limiting factors” wereresponsible for the region’s sociopolitical landscape.Other topics explored by cultural ecologists includedland use and subsistence patterns, material culture,and trade and exchange.

The first major alternative to Steward’s paradigmemerged in the 1950s with Claude Lévi-Strauss’s brandof French structuralism, which became increasinglypopular in Amazonian studies with the publication ofhis Mythologiques volumes in the 1960s. Lévi-Straussdrew on the wealth of myths recorded amongAmazonian tribes, particularly those of the Gê, todevelop his structural analysis. Whereas scholars ofthe materialist tradition of Steward focused on theenvironmental and technological interface, Frenchstructuralists emphasized the cognitive and symbolicaspects of Amazonian societies. Furthermore, theevolutionary typologies employed by Steward con-trasted with the synchronic analysis of particulargroups favored by French structuralists. What bothtraditions had in common, however, was the pre-sumption that Amazonian societies were intrinsicallysmall, dispersed, autonomous, and egalitarian.

British social anthropologists began to conductethnographic research in Amazonia during the late1960s, and challenged this view of Amazonian socialorganization. Ethnographic research in Central Braziland the Guianas provided complementary materialsto explore the intricacies of Amazonian sociopoliti-cal organization—a theme largely absent from theHandbook synthesis. Amazonian anthropologists ofthis tradition focused on studies of warfare, leadershipand factionalism, gender roles, kinship, and marriage.Peter Rivière’s 1969 trail-breaking monograph onAmazonian kinship, Marriage Among the Trio: A

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMISH 65

Principle of Social Organization, was influential inestablishing the importance of affinal categories toAmazonian societies. The dialectical nature ofAmazonian societies was also explored by DavidMaybury-Lewis in his 1979 edited volume, DialecticalSocieties: The Gê and Bororo of Central Brazil.

North American anthropology was also influencedduring the late 1970s by contemporary transforma-tions in the Boasian tradition and the growing influ-ence of European schools. Emphasis shifted away fromcultural ecology to the new fields of ethnoscience andsymbolic anthropology that focused on cognitive andcosmological systems. These approaches contrastedwith the sociobiological approach practiced byChagnon and other ethnographers and physicalanthropologists in the Amazon, who viewed foragingsocieties as comparative to early man.

The popularity of Amazonia among all theoreticaltraditions increased during the last few decades ofthe twentieth century and coincided with significantrevisions of the standard model. Reasons for thedemise of the old synthesis included a historical turnin the understanding of pre-Colombian populationsand revisions in the appreciation of contemporaryindigenous social formations. The field of humanecology embraced these changes and shifted from anadaptationist paradigm that focused on limiting fac-tors and optimal foraging theories to the documenta-tion of indigenous resource management strategies.The research program of historical ecology furtherpostulated that indigenous societies are not passivelyadapted to Amazonian environments, but activelytransform these through the creation of anthro-pogenic landscapes.

Other new directions in Amazonian anthropologyincluded a revision of descent and alliance theories anda greater attention to ideas of personhood, identity, per-formance, and representation. As traditionally definedcategories of analysis are increasingly deconstructed,there is a shift in analysis away from the village toregional interactions and an appreciation of local,regional, and global scales of integration. Furthermore,there is a greater synthesis of historical, archaeological,linguistic, and ethnographic data to achieve these ends.Anna Roosevelt’s 1994 book Amazonian Indians fromPrehistory to the Present goes a long way toward achiev-ing such a synthesis, which continues to prove elusive.

The recent controversy over Chagnon’s work amongthe Yanomami, extensively covered in Borofsky’sYanomami: The Fierce Controversy and What We Can

Learn From It has also drawn attention to the regionand revolutionized debate about ethics within anthro-pology. At the same time, Amazonian anthropology isbroadening to incorporate new themes that reflectthese and other changing realities. As anthropologistspay more attention to issues of gender, power, andidentity, the more they integrate the increasingactivism of indigenous Amazonians into anthropo-logical research and practice.

— Meredith Dudley and James Welch

Further Readings

Balée, W. (1994). Footprints of the forest: Ka’aporEthnobotany—the historical ecology of plantutilization by an Amazonian people. New York:Columbia University Press.

Borofsky, R. (2005). Yanomami: The fierce controversyand what we can learn from it. Berkeley: Universityof California Press.

Hill, J. D., &. Santos-Granero, F. (Eds.). (2002).Comparative Arawakan histories: Rethinkinglanguage family and culture area in Amazonia.Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Maybury-Lewis, D. (Ed.). (1979). Dialectical societies:The Gê and Bororo of central Brazil. Cambridge:Harvard University Press.

Meggers, B. J. (1971). Amazonia: Man and culture in acounterfeit paradise. Chicago: Aldine.

Moran, E. (1993). Through Amazonian eyes: Thehuman ecology of Amazonian populations. IowaCity: University of Iowa Press.

Rival, L., & Whitehead, N. (Eds.). (2001). Beyond thevisible and the material: The Amerindianization ofsociety in the work of Peter Rivière. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Rivière, P. (1969). Marriage among the trio: A principleof social organization. Oxford: Clarendon.

Roosevelt, A. (Ed.). (1994). Amazonian Indians fromprehistory to the present. Tucson: University ofArizona Press.

Steward, J. (1948). The handbook of South AmericanIndians. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution.

4 AMISH

The Amish are an Anabaptist religious isolate. Thereare currently over 180,000 Amish residing in theUnited States and Canada, with about two thirds

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMISH66

living in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Indiana. Theterminology Old Order Amish distinguishes themfrom Mennonites and New Order Amish, who arealso Anabaptists but who follow a lifestyle that allowsmore contact with the outside world.

Historical Background

The Amish arose out of the Anabaptist (SwissBrethren) movement in early 16th-century Europe.The Anabaptists believed in voluntary adult baptism,rather than state-sponsored infant baptism, andrefused to bear arms, both of which resulted in theirbeing severely persecuted. The Martyr’s Mirror, a bookstill found in most contemporary Amish homes, doc-uments how hundreds of Anabaptists were brutallytortured and executed for their religious beliefs.

The group now known as the Amish separated fromthe Mennonites, one of the early Anabaptist groups, in1693, primarily because they believed in a stricteradherence to the doctrine of meidung, or a total shun-ning of excommunicated church members. Followingthis separation, the Amish migrated throughout theGerman-speaking parts of Europe, where they werepersecuted for their beliefs. To escape this persecution,many Amish migrated to North America betweenabout 1727 and 1860. There are no longer any Amishin Europe.

Language

The Amish speak a German dialect (PennsylvaniaDutch) within the group and use High German intheir church services. With the exception of preschoolchildren, who do not formally learn English until theyenter school, all are generally fluent in English.

Organization

The primary unit of organization for the Amish isthe congregation, or church district. There areapproximately 1,300 Amish congregations. Eachcongregation consists of an average of 30 householdsand approximately 150 people and is led by a bishop,with the assistance of two to three ministers andone deacon. These religious leaders, who serve for life,are nominated by adult church members but chosenby lot. Thus, religious leadership is thought to bedetermined by God. Church districts are groupedgeographically into settlements. There is no higher

level of formal organization or authority above thechurch district.

Biweekly worship services are held in homes; thereis no separate church building. Each church districthas its own Ordnung, or the orally transmitted rulesthat govern the everyday behavior of the Amish. TheOrdnung is reaffirmed twice a year during commu-nion. The Ordnung consists both of rules that arecommon to all Amish and rules that are specific toeach congregation. While distinctive patterns of dressand use of horse and buggy travel leads the outsiderto assume homogeneity among the Amish, variabilityin the Ordnung across congregations results in sub-stantial variability among the Amish.

Individuals are not considered full members of thechurch until they accept adult baptism. Adult baptismgenerally occurs between the ages of 17 and 24,depending on the individual’s readiness to join thechurch and accept its rules. If a member consistentlyviolates the rules of the Ordnung, a hierarchy ofresponses is initiated to try and assist the member tobehave in accordance with the Ordnung. If the indi-vidual refuses to come into line, the highest level ofresponse is excommunication in association withmeidung (shunning). At the most extreme, meidungrequires all members of the congregation (and byextension all Amish), to have absolutely no contactwith the shunned individual. However, a shunnedperson who repents can be reincorporated into thecommunity. The severity of the meidung has beendecreasing in recent years in many congregations.

Key Beliefs

The core organizing principle for Amish society is theirreligion, which is embedded in every aspect of theirlives. Amish behavior is guided by a number of keyprinciples. Perhaps the most important of these isGelassenheit, which roughly translates as acting withhumility and simplicity at all times. The Amish believethat true grace can best be achieved by living in isola-tion from the temptations of the non-Amish world.Separation from the world is fostered by the utilizationof symbols, such as distinctive clothing and horse-and-buggy travel. The Amish recognize they can best remainseparated from the world if they maintain strong com-munity ties and, in particular, freely provide each otherwith assistance when needed. A communal barn raisingis one of the better-known examples of mutual aid, butmutual aid is actually involved in virtually all aspects of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:15 PM

AMISH 67

daily life. Like all Anabaptists, the Amishbelieve in adult baptism. The Amish adhereto absolute nonviolence, separation fromthe rest of the world, and the belief that itis their duty to obey secular authoritiesunless those authorities interfere in reli-gious matters.

Economic System and Change

The Amish have historically been small-scale and largely self-sufficient family farm-ers. However, they have been undergoing atransition over the past 50 to 60 years to aneconomic system based primarily on wagelabor. Although there is considerable vari-ability between settlements, the majorityof Amish men now work in wage laboroccupations. Some wage laborers workprimarily with other Amish men, either inAmish-owned shops or in Amish con-struction crews, but an increasing numberof men now work in factories where theyhave intensive contact with the non-Amish.This transition appears to be a response tothe joint effects of a rapid rate of population increaseand an increase in the cost of farmland. Althoughthe Amish are often thought of as a static society, theyhave a history of selectively accepting changes theyfeel will not violate key religious beliefs but areessential for economic survival, and thus the per-sistence of their culture. Factory work would haveresulted in excommunication 50 to 60 years ago, forexample.

Health

Health among the Amish is generally associated withan ability to perform one’s work and the ability to eatwell. The Amish obtain health care from biomedicalpractitioners, from a variety of complementary andalternative health care providers, and through the useof home remedies. Amish families are very likely toaccept biomedical treatments, regardless of cost, thatrestore normal functioning but are likely to stronglyresist treatments primarily designed to simply extendlife without restoring normal functioning. The Amishtraditionally have relied on personal savings and vari-ous mechanisms of mutual assistance, rather thanhealth insurance.

The Amish originated from a relatively smallfounding population, and each major settlement hasremained largely genetically isolated from both otherAmish settlements and the surrounding U.S. andCanadian populations for a little over 200 years. As aresult, a number of distinctive recessive disordershave developed among the Amish. Other than thesegenetic disorders, the general pattern of illness andcauses of mortality among the Amish are similar tothose for the United States as a whole.

The Life Course

The Amish have very strong religious proscriptionsagainst both birth control and abortion. Children arehighly valued and considered gifts from God. As aresult, Amish females tend to have high fertility rates,with an average completed fertility of 7 to 8 children.

Amish parents believe that raising their childrento accept adult baptism and join the Amish churchis their most important responsibility. Infants areviewed as not yet having the ability to distinguishbetween right and wrong, making it inappropriatefor them to be punished. Amish infants are primar-ily cared for by their parents, but older children,

Source: © iStockphoto/Diane Diederich.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AMISH68

particularly older female children, will generally playan important role in child care, even in infancy. Oncethey leave infanthood, however, Amish parentsbelieve that it is their moral obligation to firmlyand consistently correct their children, sometimesincluding physical punishment (spanking). However,Amish culture emphasizes that any corrective behav-ior performed in anger will not be an effective learn-ing event.

Because the Amish see work as central to bothgood health and being a good Christian, they assignAmish children age-appropriate chores from an earlyage. There were many useful and meaningful tasks forchildren of all ages when most Amish were farmers.The transition to wage labor has resulted in fewermeaningful chores for the young, a consequence thatconcerns many Amish.

Amish children attend school through the eighthgrade, most often in an Amish school but sometimes ina public school. A Supreme Court decision exemptedAmish from compulsory education through age 16on the basis of religious freedom. All boys and manygirls enter the workforce once they finish school. Boys

with fathers who farm will often assist with farmwork, but many boys now work in Amish shops orconstruction crews, or for non-Amish businesses.Girls generally work as domestics, in both Amish andnon-Amish homes.

The period from the late teens to the early twen-ties is when youth must decide if they will make alifelong commitment to join the Amish church (andthus reject non-Amish life). Because joining thechurch must be a conscious and voluntary decision,this is a period (called rumspringa) during whichsome Amish youth are allowed greater latitude aboutchurch rules. Some experiment with various aspectsof non-Amish culture, listening to the radio, drivingcars, or dressing in non-Amish clothing. Once theyjoin the church, such behaviors will not be possible.A small proportion of Amish youth develop prob-lems with alcohol, drugs, and tobacco during thisperiod. However, most Amish youth move throughrumspringa with little difficulty. This is seen in thefact that the majority of youth, varying from 80% to95% in different settlements, join the Amish church.(Contrary to a recent television portrayal, Amishyouth rarely actually leave their communities duringrumpsringa.)

The Amish family is patriarchal, with the husbandand father being the final authority in the house-hold. Husbands and wives, however, are economicallyinterdependent. Husbands are expected to providefor the family financially, and wives are expected tomaintain the household and contribute economicallyby such tasks as food-producing gardens, canning,and making of clothing for the family. Divorce isstrictly prohibited.

Amish elders are highly respected. Elders try tolive as independently as possible, often moving into asmall, but separate house connected to one of theirchildren’s homes (grossdawdy house). In the past, thismove would occur when the parents turned overtheir farm to one of their children. Once the elderlyperson is no longer capable of living independently,he or she will generally either move in with one ofher children, or her children will take turns provid-ing care for the elder.

The Amish have well-established rituals associatedwith death, which is seen as an expected life transitionand associated with eternal salvation. As a result,death appears to be associated with less stress than inmany societies. Family members should be allowed, ifat all possible, to die at home. If a hospital death is

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANASAZI 69

unavoidable, the dying person will be surrounded byfamily and church members.

The Future

There has long been concern among both academicsand the Amish for the ability of the Amish to main-tain their cultural identity in the face of the economictransition from farming to wage labor. The fear is thatthis transition will ultimately affect core Amish valuesdue to an increased contact with the non-Amishworld, the fact that fathers are no longer as involvedin child care, the increased income, benefits, andleisure time associated with wage labor, and thepotential that this will lead to socioeconomic stratifi-cation. At the present time, however, all indicationsare that Amish culture is strong and resilient.

— Jill E. Korbin and Lawrence P. Greksa

Further Readings

Greksa, L. P. (2002). Population growth and fertilitypatterns in an Old Order Amish settlement. Annalsof Human Biology, 29, 192–201.

Greksa, L. P., & Korbin, J. E. (2002). Key decisions inthe lives of the Old Order Amish: Joining thechurch and migrating to another settlement.Mennonite Quarterly Review, LXXVI,373–398.

Kraybill, D. B. (2001). The riddle of Amish culture(2nd ed.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UniversityPress.

Kreps, G. M., Donnermeyer, J. F., & Kreps, M. W.(1994). The changing occupational structure ofAmish males. Rural Sociology, 59, 708–719.

McKusick, V. A. (Ed.). (1978). Medical genetic studiesof the Amish. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UniversityPress.

Nolt, S. M. (1992). A history of the Amish. Intercourse,PA: Good Books.

4 ANASAZI

In the American Southwest, the four corners area ofsouthern Utah, southwestern Colorado, northwesternNew Mexico, and northern Arizona was home primar-ily to a culture typically referred to as the Anasazi.

Now called Ancestral Puebloan (Anasazi is a Navajoword meaning “ancient enemy”), thoughts of thisculture bring to mind the cliff dwellings scatteredthroughout the northern American Southwest. Whilethese architectural features are impressive, they areonly one aspect of the rich and varied history ofthis culture.

Culture History

Humans have inhabited the northern Southwest sincePaleo-Indian times (ca. 11,000–7,000 BC). At approx-imately 7,000 BC, a shift to a warmer, drier climateresulted in a change in lifeways to what archaeologistsrefer to as a “broad-spectrum pattern of resourceuse.” Essentially, populations no longer relied on largegame animals such as mammoth as a primary meansof subsistence; rather, the focus shifted to use ofsmaller game and an increased reliance on variedplant resources. This period of time is referred to asthe “Archaic”; research has traced Ancestral Puebloanhistory to the Archaic peoples who occupied thenorthern region of the Southwest until 500 BC, whenthe distinctive Puebloan culture developed as peoplebegan to supplement hunting and gathering withmaize horticulture.

Following the Archaic, visibly Ancestral Puebloantraits emerge in the northern Southwest during a timeknown as the “Basket Maker period.” Archaeologistshave summarized changes in Puebloan culture using achronological system termed the Pecos Classification.The Pecos Classification was developed by A. V. Kidderand others at the first annual Pecos Conference (1927)in an attempt to organize these cultural changesin the northern Southwest. Originally intended torepresent a series of developmental stages ratherthan time periods, it is the most widely accepted ter-minology in referring to temporal changes in theAncestral Pueblo region of the Southwest. Althougharchaeologists no longer see the Pecos sequence as areconstruction of adaptive change throughout theSouthwest, it is still used to provide a general frame-work for dates and broad events within and affectingthe Ancestral Puebloan region for each of the majortime periods

Basket Maker II: 500 BC–AD 450

There are two competing theories pertaining tothe origins of the Basket Maker culture. They are

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANASAZI70

that: (a) The Basket Makers descended from localArchaic populations and (b) the Basket Makers repre-sent a migration of maize-dependent populationsfrom an outside area. There is evidence to supportboth models, and there are inconsistencies in both.What is clear, however, is the persistence of a clearlyAncestral Puebloan culture following the Archaic.

Basket Maker II sites are documented throughoutthe Four Corners region. These sites certainly do notfit the stereotypical idea of the ancestral Puebloans as“cliff dwellers.” Basket Maker II sites are characterizedby caves or rock shelters often used for storage, smallstorage pits (some slab lined), shallow pithouses thatwere not occupied year-round, and evidence forsquash and maize cultivation. Material culture of thisperiod included coiled and plaited basketry (thus thename Basket Maker), spear throwers or atlatis, fairlylarge corner-and side-notched projectile points, one-handed manos and basin metates, and rabbit fur

blankets. The presence of stockades at a number ofthese sites may suggest the early instances of warfareduring ancestral Puebloan times. Certainly, the com-plexity of ancestral Puebloan culture is evident duringthis early period in their history.

Basket Maker III: AD 450–750

In general, the Basket Maker III phase representsthe continuation of the Basket Maker II phase.According to Lipe, the start of the Basket Maker IIItradition is clearly marked by the appearance of aplain gray (called “Lino Gray”) ceramics in thearchaeological record. In general, this pottery is fairlysimple in decoration and form but marks an impor-tant shift in settlement and subsistence. Additionalfeatures of Basket Maker III appear to represent con-tinued traditions that were first established duringthe preceding Basket Maker II tradition. The useof pithouses continued during Basket Maker III,

although these pithouses were deeper andlarger than before; many had antecham-bers. Surface storage structures increasedin size from the preceding period, andthe presence of these features, as wellas ceramic vessels and increased use oftrough metates, indicates a greater relianceon food processing and storage, althoughhunting and gathering still remainedimportant to subsistence.

Pueblo I: AD 750–900

Pueblo I is best known for the areaaround Mesa Verde. This period is charac-terized by periods of aggregation andabandonment of short-lived villages;abandonments of these villages appear tooccur with periods of extended drought,likely resulting in crop failure. Architectureis characterized by jacal construction andsimple masonry surface rooms arrangedin two rows, built as “modular units” andthe continuation of pit structures used forhabitation. Great kivas were first recog-nized at Chaco Canyon during this timeperiod; these are large kivas that rangefrom 40 to 60 feet in diameter in somesettlements. Storage rooms were oftenlocated on the northern end of the modu-lar units. Material culture and key charac-teristics of this tradition included theSource: © iStockphoto/Adrian Stapleton.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANASAZI 71

practice of cradleboard deformation; ceramics includedgraywares in the form of neckbanded ceramic jars andtrade redware jars and vessels. Small, temporally diag-nostic stemmed projectile points are related to small-game hunting with bow and arrow.

Pueblo II: AD 900–1100

The Pueblo II period is characterized by the devel-opment of spalled stone masonry construction andthe presence of fully developed kivas. In some areas,settlements are large and represent well-planned com-munities. This pattern was recognized first for ChacoCanyon (New Mexico), an area that seems to havebeen the center or capital of the ancestral Puebloanworld during the Pueblo II period. These well-planned communities include massively built struc-tures called “Great Houses,” such as Pueblo Bonito atChaco Canyon surrounded by the unit pueblos firstidentified for the Pueblo I period. These Great Housesare often referred to as “community houses”; they donot appear to have functioned as habitation struc-tures. In Chaco Canyon, this pattern was concen-trated, however, outside of Chaco Canyon; similarcommunities were constructed throughout the north-ern Southwest, on a smaller scale. Other architecturalfeatures included field houses (interpreted as tempo-rary habitations/shelters used while agriculture fieldswere being tended) and water control features suchas check dams and reservoirs. Material remains associ-ated with the Puebloan II period are varied, rangingfrom seemingly simple corrugated jars, textiles, andrelatively small corner-notched projectile points withconvex bases and expanding stems to extensive tradegoods reflecting a trade network that may havereached as far south as Mexico. The meaning of the“Chacoan” pattern is still debated; however, the influ-ence of Chaco Canyon during this period is apparent.

Pueblo III: AD 1100–1300

The Pueblo III period is best known for the MesaVerde area of the northern Southwest. Early archaeol-ogists called this the “Great Pueblo period.” This is thetime during which the well-known cliff dwellingswere constructed. Chaco Canyon seems to have lostits place of importance in the Puebloan world, andpopulation increased in and around Mesa Verde. Thisphase is marked by architectural continuity in theform of modular room blocks; however, multistoriedpueblos appeared at this time, and the use of shaped

stone masonry became common. Bi- and triwalledtowers similar to those found at Hovenweep appearedduring the Pueblo III period; the function of thesestructures is unknown, although their use as a defen-sive feature has been postulated. It is the abandon-ment of the Mesa Verde region that has led tospeculation about the “mysterious disappearance ofthe Anasazi.” Research tells us, however, that while theregion was abandoned, the Puebloan people did notdisappear.

Pueblo IV (AD 1300–Contact)

By 1300, the entire Mesa Verde region was virtuallyabandoned. The explanations for the abandonmentof this area often centers on environmental change.Following the abandonment of the Mesa Verderegion, population size increased in the area aroundthe Zuni and Rio Grande area of New Mexico. By theend of Pueblo III, people moved to essentially wherethey lived when the Spanish arrived. The aggregatedvillages that were inhabited at that time look like thepueblos of today.

While many fantastic theories speculate about the“disappearance of the Anasazi,” it is clear that thepeople that inhabit the pueblos of Arizona and NewMexico are the descendants of the Puebloans of thepast. The Ancestral Puebloan region of the Southwestwas marked by a series of reorganizations, abandon-ments, and occupations. The “disappearance” thatseemed to mark the end of the Ancestral Puebloanway of life was simply a new beginning.

— Caryn M. Berg

See also Cannibalism; Native Peoples of the United States

Further Readings

Adler, M. A. (Ed.). (1996). The prehistoric pueblo worldA.D. 1150–1350. Tucson: University of ArizonaPress.

Cassells, E. S. (1997). The archaeology of Colorado(Rev. ed.). Boulder, CO: Johnson Books.

Cordell, L. S. (1997). Archaeology of the Southwest(2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Lekson, S. H. (1999). The Chaco meridian: Centers ofpolitical power in the ancient Southwest. WalnutCreek, CA: Alta Mira Press.

Plog, S. (1997). Ancient peoples of the AmericanSouthwest. New York: Thames & Hudson.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANCESTOR WORSHIP72

Reed, P. F. (Ed.). (2000). Foundations of Anasaziculture: The Basketmaker-Pueblo transition. SaltLake City: University of Utah Press.

Schlanger, S. H. (Ed.). (2002). Traditions, transitions,and technologies: Themes in southwesternarchaeology. Boulder: University Press of Colorado.

Wills, W. H., & Leonard R. D. (Eds.). (1994). Theancient southwestern community: Models andmethods for the study of prehistoric socialorganization. Albuquerque: University of NewMexico Press.

4 ANCESTOR WORSHIP

Ancestor worship is often referred to as the ancestralcult, namely, a set of religious beliefs and ritual prac-tices that commemorates the continued existence ofthe deceased ancestor beyond death. The rites of thiscult are meant to cater to the needs of the diseasedin the afterlife. The beliefs of this cult center on theability of the dead to protect kinsmen in return forworship from them. Reciprocity between the livingand the dead is the key to ancestor worship.

Two forms of ancestor worship can be identified inthe anthropological literature. One is a domestic cult,which is observed by the family in dedication to itsrecent ancestors rather than remote ones. The otheris observed by the descent group in dedication toits common ancestors in the remote past. As a cult ofthe descent group, ancestor worship functions toprescribe the principle of rights and obligations(jural authority) and the rules of conduct for theliving, who form a property-holding corporate group.Not only are these rules and principles institutional-ized in social structure and organization, but theyalso regulate individual access to the benefits of thecorporate property. In short, they serve to keep upthe social relations of the living world. Members ofthe descent group venerate their common ancestrycommunally, in addition to individual observanceof ancestor worship as a domestic cult.

Aspects of Ancestor Worship

Conceptual Issues

Ancestor worship, or “the worship of the Manes,” isno ordinary cult of the dead. It is, for example, not

applicable to children who die young or to deadelders who belong to a different kin group, becauseneither qualify as ancestors. Demonstrative ancestryis the litmus test for such worship. The deceased muststand in a line of identified human progenitors to theliving in order to receive ancestor worship from them.It follows that the mythical beings or animals reveredas totemic forebears by the aboriginal clans in Australiaare not receivers of “ancestor worship” in the propersense of the term.

The concept of ancestor becomes more compli-cated when parenthood is not based on natural con-ception and gestation. In adoptions, ancestorhood iscreated by jural action where natural offspring arelacking. Chinese parents, for example, have the rightto manipulate the filiation of their children jurallyand put them up for adoption by either partner’spatrilineage in case its continuity of succession andinheritance is tenuous or in danger of a breakdown.It enables close relatives without biological heirsto receive ancestor worship after death and avoidbecoming “orphaned ghosts” that would harass theliving. In all adoptions, ancestor worship is made tocontinue on the jural manipulation of filiation.

Marriage provides another way of manipulatingancestor worship. A case in point is in-married malesin Japan and China. With offspring typically becom-ing members of mother’s natal groups in a uxorilocalmarriage, an in-married male can expect to receiveworship only in the ancestral line of the wife’s family.There is also the Chinese custom of ghost marriage,in which a never-married dead female is wedded to aliving male ceremonially so that she can receive wor-ship from the offspring of his future marriage andbecome an ancestress of the conjugal family. Last butnot the least, ancestorhood is jurally sanctioned inmany African societies where birth in legal wedlockis often a prerequisite for ancestor worship, but thefather is not necessarily the true begetter. It is notunusual that in Asian and African cultures, descent isultimately defined in the context of ancestor worship.

Ancestor veneration is often used interchangeablywith ancestor worship. However, the term worshipunderscores a reverence of what is divine and super-natural, thus carrying a more religious undertone.Central to the rites and rituals of ancestor worship aresacrificial offerings. Offerings to ancestors may takethe form of an informal family rite, a formal templeliturgy, or a community festival. All forms of offeringinvolve purification and communication. Purity may

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANCESTOR WORSHIP 73

be inherent in the proper preparation of ritual objects,such as the masks used in African ancestor worship,which must stay out of touch by women. But water isthe most common cleansing agent, hence the impor-tance of bathing and sprinkling. Communication istypically through multiple channels, including ges-tures, music, recitations, and chanting.

Paradigmatic Issues

Since the mid-19th century, a number of para-digms have been proposed for the analysis of ancestorworship. Among them are the body-soul model, thepsychoanalytical model, the Africanist model, themultifunctionalist model, and the divine ownershipmodel.

The Body-Soul Model. The dichotomy of body andsoul dominated the early studies of ancestor worship,as in Ancient Law, by Henry Sumner Maine (1861); Lacité antique, by Fustel de Coulanges (1864); PrimitiveCulture, by Edward B. Taylor (1874); The Principle ofSociology, by Herbert Spencer (1875–1876); and so on.

The body-soul paradigm was built on whatappeared to be a universal belief, namely, the beliefthat after the death of the body, the soul continued toexist, as evidenced by its appearance in dream or in analtered state of consciousness. The worship of theancestral souls turned the family or gens (agnatickinsmen) into a corporate group perpetuated bythe system of collective property holding. With a legalfiction, ancestor worship invested in the patriarchthe qualities of a corporation so that he enjoyed rightsin governing the family, or gens, but stood under theduty to hold its collective possessions in trust forfuture generations. For Herbert Spencer, ancestorworship was the root of every religion.

The critics of this paradigm called attention to thefact that ancestor worship was a “family cult.” Sincethe family was absent from the early stages of humansociety, this cult could not have spawned other typesof religious institution. It paved the way for EmileDurkheim to introduce “the cult of the clan,” namely,totemism as the most primitive form of religious life(1912). Before long, however, new study dispelled themyth of “primitive promiscuity” to establish the uni-versality of marital institutions and family life.

The Psychoanalytic Model. The primacy of the familywas reinstated in Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalyticmodel (1913). Within its framework, ancestor worship

is a ritual of atonement for the “original sin.”Presumablydriven by the Oedipus complex, the first sons com-mitted the sin against their father for his wives. Thenovercome by profound remorse and fear of a vengefuldead father, the sons held the first totemic sacrifice,identifying the animal with the dead ancestor andgiving him the status of divinity. Thus, ancestorworship arose in response to deep emotional conflictsand weaknesses. Despite its sheer speculation aboutthe original sin, the psychoanalytic model has beeninfluential in the study of attitudes toward the deadancestor cross-culturally.

According to Freud, ambivalence is characteristicof all human emotions, including love, behind whichthere is a repressed hostility. Ethnographic fieldworkhas revealed that such ambivalence varies cross-culturally. Depending on the socialization patternsthat are shaped culturally and historically, somesocieties express ambivalence in mixed attitudes tothe dead, others in predominantly hostile attitudeswith the benevolent aspects suppressed, and stillothers in predominantly benevolent attitudes withthe hostile aspects suppressed.

The Africanist Model. This model is intellectuallyindebted to Radcliffe-Brown, for whom the socialneeds for continuity are sui generis. For society tomaintain its existence and stability, there must be aformulation of rights over people and things thatserves to regulate social relationships. Indeed, theAfricanists saw social structure as a jural construc-tion. Following Meyer Fortes’s investigation of theTallensi, several studies examined how ancestor wor-ship provided a jural construction in the Africanpolity. Their conclusion was that ancestor worshipis a crucial unifying force in the African segmentarylineage system.

Drawing on his African data, Fortes also refinedthe analysis of Freudian ambivalence. Among theTallensi, the father-son relations are affectionatebecause the patriarchal authority is perceived to oper-ate on a commission from the ancestors, and a posi-tive value is put on submission to the authorityinvested in the father and tribal elders. Consequently,the repressed or latent resentment that a son has doesnot surface as hostility toward the ancestors. An inter-esting twist is reported by Jack Good of the repressedhostility between the heir and property holder amongthe LoDagaba. This culture allows for duel descentsystems. By farming for his own father, a man obtains

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANCESTOR WORSHIP74

the right to the goods he needs for bridewealthpayments, but not to the property accumulated byhis father. In contrast, he stands to gain property (andpossibly wives) from his maternal uncle. It is betweenthese two that the hostility is considerable. Upon theuncle’s death, however, guilt prevails, prompting theheir to sacrifice to the dead ancestor, who continuesto be perceived as the property holder, capable of trou-ble making unless the ritual obligations are fulfilled.

The Multifunctionalist Model. With The CommonDescent Group in China and Its Functions (1948), HuHsien-chin was the first to explore the multifunction-ality of the Chinese descent group zu in sociologicalterms. By analyzing the zu in the context of ancestorworship, she aptly presented it as a descent-based kingroup, a property-holding entity, and a body politic.One of Hu’s most important conclusions is that his-torically, the development of the zu was the strongestwhere the government control was the weakest. Butit was Maurice Freedman who proposed a coherenttheory of the zu (now called a lineage) in addition toa unitary account of its multifarious functions.Theoretically, this paradigm represents a move awayfrom the Africanist emphasis on descent toward therole of corporate land in a centralized polity.

The corporate nature of the Chinese lineage findsexpression in its landholdings as ancestral estatesrather than a territorial dominion. For Freedman,lineage property in the form of ancestral estates isbuilt “from the ground up,” that is, from the establish-ment of corporate land by the joint family. The sizeof lineage property is structurally deterministic. As aChinese lineage’s accumulation of land increases, sodoes its structural complexity. Using the functionalrole of corporate land as the fulcrum, Freedmanunravels the multiple layers of the Chinese lineage—social structure, agnatic brotherhood, economicactivities, power politics, ancestor worship, folkbeliefs (geomancy), and so on. Admittedly, ancestorworship is what shapes the asymmetric segmentationof the Chinese lineage, but its observance depends onproceedings from the ancestral land endowments. Itis the uneven distribution of ancestral estates thatdetermines the patterns of lineage life, whether social,economic, or political.

The multifunctionalist paradigm has impacted thestudy of the Chinese lineage for decades. Nevertheless,implicit in its analysis is the idea that the significanceof corporate land is to be interpreted in economic

terms. This is likely to create serious problems forthe investigation of ancestor worship. When lineagemembers are viewed as utilitarian individuals, eachseeking to maximize his own gain at the cost ofagnatic brothers, ancestor worship becomes merely aperfunctory product of ancestral estates. But such ananalysis leaves many questions unanswered. In reality,most lineage members worship their ancestors in theabsence of land inheritance. What makes them do so?How could the lineage property be sustained or growif the descendants were all utilitarian creatures? Whydid they agree to the establishment of ancestralestates against their utilitarian interests in the firstplace? What is so special about corporate land that itcan hold agnatic brothers together despite the temp-tation to break it up? And so on and so forth.

The Divine Ownership Model. Allen Chun developedhis model as a reaction to the Eurocentric utilitarian-ism of the multifunctionalist paradigm. In his view,the utilitarian analysis of Chinese lineage propertybetrays a total disregard of the native distinctionbetween “ownership” and “possession” in the tradi-tional Chinese property concepts. While the Westernnotion of property entails an integration of owner-ship and possession to some degree, they are concep-tually distinct in Chinese. With respect to lineageproperty, its ownership is to be held collectively by thedescendants in the name of ancestors, which makesit divine and inalienable. In contrast, its possessioncan be properly attributed to the most senior lineagemember as the Corporation Sole, who manages theproperty in trust for future generations. Last but notthe least, the Chinese terms used to describe theinheritance of property connote neither ownershipnor possession, but rather productiveness, as inchanye (“productive enterprise”) and zuchan (“lin-eage productive medium”). Because of divine owner-ship, corporate land has little intrinsic value in itself.What makes land indispensable is its capacity to serveas a means of sustaining production and procuringwealth for the survival of a kin group.

Land is evidently crucial to the existence of theChinese zu or lineage. However, the assertion that cor-porate land is the raison d’être of ancestor worship ismisguided. On the contrary, it is ancestor worship thatgives rise to corporate land and establishes its inalien-ability in terms of divine ownership. Proceeding fromthe divine ownership of land, ancestor worship pro-vides a coherent system of norms and values that

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANCESTOR WORSHIP 75

sanctions the proper transmission and managementof lineage property. Among these norms and valuesare filial piety, agnatic obligations, and descent rules.Common descent, which is to be defined in the con-text of ancestor worship, is instrumental in securingand maintaining the continuity of corporate land. Itbrings about a sense of togetherness, enhances theawareness of a collective conscience, and providesthe basis for a moral code of conduct. Owing to itsadherence to ancestor worship, the Chinese zu is whatDurkheim calls a “moral community.”

Cross-Cultural Variationof Transition to Ancestorhood

Beliefs in an afterlife appear to be ubiquitous whereancestor worship is practiced. In Robert Hertz’s view,such beliefs appear to be a response to the basic con-tradiction between the mortality of the human bodyand the immortality of the body politic. As a supple-ment to man’s earthly span, a Land of the Dead is pos-tulated vis-à-vis the Land of the Living. But how thisafterlife is postulated varies from culture to culture.

The ancestral cult is widely practiced in WestAfrican societies, including the Ewe of Ghana, whohave very definite ideas about life and death. The Ewebelieve that human life is composed of two souls. Atdeath, their union is dissolved, one returning toMawu, the creator, and the other to Tsiefe, the spiritworld. Rituals are performed to help the dead com-plete the journey to Tsiefe. It is not until after the per-formance of the final postburial ritual that the spiritof the dead soul is thought to have joined the ances-tral family and invited to partake of the food offeredin the ritual of ancestor worship. But the ritual is heldirregularly by the lineage or clan and may entail along wait. Again, the basis of Ewe ancestor worship isthat in the afterlife, the dead ancestors continue toshow active interest in the mundane affairs of theliving. On all ceremonial occasions, the ancestorsmust be invoked through customary libations, andthey are fed on the ceremonial stools that serve astheir shrines. The continuity between life and deathis made possible by the rebirth of the souls in Tsiefe.

As is obvious from Ewe ancestor worship, afterlifeinvolves a gradual transformation of statuses. It ispossible to identify the phases of this transformationwith what Arnold van Gennep calls “rites of passage.”The first phase is associated with rites of separation,whereby the dead soul is cut off from his earlier statusas a living being. The second phase is associated with

rites of transition, whereby the dead comes out ofseparation and starts the sojourn to ancestorhood ina capacity peripheral to the worlds of the living andthe dead. The last phase is associated with rites ofincorporation, whereby the dead becomes a memberof the ancestral family. The rites of transition appearto show the greatest cross-cultural variation in termsof duration and complexity. This transitional phase isotherwise known as the stage of liminality. In the Ewecase, the liminal period lasts from the burial to thefirst ritual whenever it comes along.

Among the Merina of Madagascar, the duration ofliminality for the dead is undetermined for a differentreason. This culture requires that members of a descentgroup have their bones buried in ancestral tombs.Because the Merina do not live in the same place, amember is initially buried where he dies, and the burialis attended in grief and mourning. After the initial bur-ial, at some point in time, the bones are exhumed andmoved to the ancestral tomb for a secondary and finalburial. The ritual for “regrouping” the body with theancestors is joyful, for it initiates the dead into ances-torhood and kindles the hope for its expedient rebirth.Actually, birth is symbolized in the ritual by going intoand emerging from the tomb as if it were a womb.

The stage of liminality may also be prolonged forconcerns about the pollution of death. In Japan, along liminal period is instituted so that death defile-ment can be cleansed. It takes the spirit of the dead(shirei) 49 days plus purification rituals to transforminto an ancestral spirit (sorei), which is then repre-sented by a permanent wooden tablet on the house-hold Buddha altar (butsudan). But the transitionwill continue for another 33 or 50 years (dependingon the region of Japan) before the ancestral spirit canbe accepted into the body of family ancestors. That isto say, on condition that the dead soul has receivedworship dutifully ceremonially on the death anniver-sary each year and with additional memorial serviceon the 1st, 3rd, 7th, 13th, 17th, 23rd, 27th, and 33rdanniversaries if the liminal period is 33 years. Thebottom line is that the dead must be purified in orderto be accepted as an ancestor. The concern aboutdeath pollution is so great that in rural Japan, thegrave receiving the body is located far away fromthe residential area and goes by the name of the“abandoned grave.” A second “ritual grave” consistingonly of a headstone may be built near the house sothat worshippers can visit it without encountering thepollution of the dead body.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANGKOR WAT76

Robert Hertz maintains that the deceased’sintegration into the world of the dead is correlatedwith the survivors’ reintegration into the world ofthe living. Consequently, the stage of liminality termi-nates for both at the same time. In his view, this saysmore about the values and institutions of the livingthan anything else. Although he makes the commentin connection with “double burial,” the traditionalChinese system of wufu or “Five Mourning Grades”lends strong support to it.

Wufu actually means the five different types ofmourning dresses prescribed by Confucian ortho-doxy. Each type of dress was worn in mourning ofcertain consanguine or affinal relatives for a specificperiod of time. Grade 1 mourning, which was theseverest, was for the death of a parent and lasted3 years. Its mourning dress consisted of unhemmedsackcloth coat and skirt, hemp headdress, straw san-dals, and mourning staff. As the principal mourner,the oldest surviving son lived in a hut built ofbranches against the house. He ate coarse rice forfood, had water for his drinking, slept on a strawmat, and wailed twice a day. At the end of the firstyear, vegetables and fruits were added to the congee-only diet, and the hemp headdress was replaced bya raw-silk hat. No definite times were prescribed forhis wailing. For the third year, the severity of mourn-ing was further reduced so as to help the son’s lifereturn to normal.

Stipulated in the law, the wufu imposed a duty ofmourning upon the people, sanctioned by punish-ment. An official must retire from office upon thedeath of his parent and observe the 3-year mourning.To keep the fact a secret and show no signs of distresswould incur serious legal consequences as well aspublic disgrace. It is important to note that the wufusystem heavily leaned toward patrilineal relatives,especially those in the senior generations. Themourning grade for patrilineal grandparents was 2(1 year), but only 4 (5 months) for matrilineal grand-parents and 3 (9 months) for grandchildren. Centralto this mourning system was an emphasis on the cul-tivation of filial piety toward the patrilineal seniors.Filial piety or xiao was considered one of the mostimportant virtues in Chinese society, where thefather-son relationship was the cornerstone of theConfucian family system. It stressed that the sonowed his life and achievements to his father’s love andmust attend to his memory after death as if he werealive. Ultimately, however, the wufu system served the

living rather than the dead—the needs of Chinesesociety to strengthen its kinship system.

The Chinese mortuary rites did not necessarilyinvolve double burial. But because of the prolongedmourning periods prescribed by the wufu, the onlyburial that happened in many cases actually providedwhat Hertz calls the “provisional ceremony.” With theending of the wufu mourning came what a secondaryburial provides for the institution of double burial—the “final ceremony” that put closure on the chapterof liminality.

— Zhiming Zhao

See also Religious Rituals

Further Readings

Baker, H. D. R. (1979). Chinese family and kinship.New York: Columbia University Press.

Bloch, M., & Parry, J. (1982) Death and regenerationof life. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Chun, A. (2000). Unstructuring Chinese society.Amsterdam: Harwood.

Fortes, M. (1949). The web of kinship amongthe Tallensi. London: Oxford UniversityPress.

Freedman, M. (1966). Chinese lineage and society.London: Athlone.

Goody, J. (1962). Death, property, and the ancestors.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Hertz, R. (1960). A contribution to the studyof the collective representation of death (R. &C. Needham, Trans.). In R. Needham (Ed.), Deathand the right hand. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.(Original work published in French, 1907)

Newell, W. H. (1976), Ancestors. The Hague, theNetherlands: Mouton.

Van Gennep, A. (1960). The rites of passage(M. Vizedom & G. Caffe, Trans). Chicago:University of Chicago Press. (Original workpublished in French, 1908)

4 ANGKOR WAT

King Jayavarman II founded Angkor, the capitalof the Khmer Empire, in the 9th century AD innortheastern Cambodia. Angkor reached its peak of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANGKOR WAT 77

development in the 12th century under the rule ofKings Suryavarman II and Jayavarman VII. AngkorWat is a temple dedicated to the Hindu god Vishnuand is the most well-known building in the complexdespite the fact that it is only 1 of approximately 100temples spread throughout 40 miles of jungle.

The city of Angkor was planned and constructed toserve as both an administrative and religious center.Angkor was a symbolic model of the universe fromtraditional Hindu cosmology. The city was orientedaround a central pyramid temple. The outer walls ofthe temple represent the mountains that were believedto circle the edge of the world. A complicated systemof canals, moats, and reservoirs, while symbolizingthe waters in the cosmos, also conveniently providedwater for irrigation.

Kings who worshipped different gods built manyof the greatest temples at Angkor. Angkor Wat wasbuilt at the direction of King Suryavarman II in the12th century as a funerary temple. Not only was it aplace to worship Vishnu, but also upon his death, hisashes were to be interred there, solidifying his identitywith Vishnu.

Angkor Wat is easily recognizable by its five centralshrines. The tallest tower in the center rises 699 feetabove the jungle. The towers are believed to representthe five peaks of Mount Meru—the Home of theGods and center of the Hindu universe. The mainentrance faces West, the direction associated withVishnu. Earlier temples all faced East, associatingwith Siva. Three galleries and a moat surround thecenter shrines of Angkor Wat. It appears that everyinch of the temple is carved. The outer gallery wallscontain the longest continuous bas-relief in theworld. It illustrates stories from Hindu mythology,including scenes from both the Mahabharata and theRamayana, and scenes relating to Vishnu. In manyother panels, King Suryavarman II is shown holdingcourt.

The compound of Angkor Wat measures well over4,000 feet on each side and is surrounded by a vast590-foot-wide moat. The existence of the moat is thereason this particular temple has been well preserved.It helped to keep the jungle growth from encroachingon the structure. A long causeway leads to the enor-mous entrance gate. The central chamber believed tobe King Suryavarman II’s burial chamber is carvedwith many apsaras, mythical, heavenly dancers whoentertain the gods and are a reward for kings who diebravely.

In the late 13th century, Angkor was still a large,thriving metropolis, but the frenzy of ornate, elaborateconstruction had come to an end. Theravada Buddhismwas on the rise, and a restrained, simpler religiousorientation became the norm. Meanwhile, off to theWest, the Thai empire emerged as a major power inthe region. The Thais encroached on the Cambodiankingdom by moving their capital to Ayudhya, in closeproximity to Angkor. In 1389, the Thais attacked andclaimed the city. The final abandonment of Angkoroccurred in 1431, when the city was deserted and thecapital was moved eastward to the area of the currentcapital, Phnom Penh.

During the four centuries between the demise ofthe ancient city and the late 19th century, most ofthe interest in Angkor was focused on Angkor Wat.Virtually all the other temples were abandoned to thejungle, but Theravada Buddhist monks claimed andmaintained the temple for their own use.

In the 19th century, early European visitors toCambodia were interested in the stories of a “lostcity” deep in the jungle. When the French colonialregime was established in 1863, the whole area pro-voked interest in scholars. Intensive research andreconstruction followed well into the 20th century.Due to political and military upheavals in Cambodiain the late 20th century, there was some damageand thievery among Angkor temples. The greateststructural damage, however, was caused by neglect.Without constant maintenance, the structures wereonce again engulfed by jungle vegetation. In 1992,UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific,and Cultural Organization) designated the Angkorcomplex a World Heritage Site, and added it tothe List of World Heritage in Danger. This recog-nition has initiated international preservationefforts. Hopefully these fascinating cultural rem-nants will remain intact for future generations toappreciate.

— Jill M. Church

Further Readings

Freeman, M., & Jacques, C. (1999). Ancient Angkor.Trumbull, CT: Weatherhill.

Jacques, C. (1997). Angkor: Cities and temples.London: Thames & Hudson.

Laur, J. (2002). Angkor: An illustrated guide to themonuments. Paris: Flammarion.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANIMALS78

4 ANIMALS

Taxonomically, animals belong to the kingdomAnimalia, which is one of several kingdoms of livingbeings. Although there is disagreement on how tobest classify the various forms of life on Earth, othermajor groups of living beings include the bacteria,protists, fungi, and plants. The traits that define thekingdom Animalia are:

Mobility. With few exceptions, such as the sea lily (classCrinoidea), animals are able to freely move about theirhabitats and are not attached to a substrate.

Multicellularity. Animals begin their lives as a single fer-tilized ova that multiples into many cells, which differ-entiate into specialized cells and tissues. Animal bodyplans are the result of genes known as Hox genes.

Heterotrophism. Animals cannot produce their ownsource of energy and must consume organic materialsynthesized by plants.

Sexual reproduction. Reproduction in animals dependson meiosis, or the reduction division of the number ofchromosomes from a double set in the adult to a singleset in the ova in the female and sperm in the male.The ova and sperm merge to form a cell with the doubleset of chromosomes that eventually matures into anadult.

Eukaryotic cell. All animals are eukaryotes; that is, eachcell has a membrane-enclosed nucleus that contains adouble set of chromosomes, one set from each parent.

Death. Animals develop from an embryo that matures intoan adult and eventually undergoes programmed death.

There are between 30 and 35 phyla of animals.There are an estimated 1 to 2 million species of ani-mals, 98% of which are invertebrates, and morespecies are discovered every year. At least half of theinvertebrates are insects. By contrast, there are about4,500 species of mammals, 300 of which are primates.In addition to the animal phyla of insects, theArthropoda, other examples include the Chordata, orvertebrates, such as mammals; Mollusca, such asclams; Cnidaria, such as corals, Echinodermata, suchas sea stars; Platyhelminthes, such as flatworms; andNematoda, such as round worms. Animals in theirnatural habitat lead well-ordered lives in the processof finding of adequate food and other resources,reproducing, and, in some cases such as mammals,raising their young.

In addition to the scientific and taxonomic defini-tion of animals as discussed above, there is also thecultural discourse that concerns animality versushumanity. The basic dichotomy is between Westerncultures that view the difference between animals andhumans as a difference of kind and Eastern culturesthat view this difference as one of degree. As a conse-quence of the attitude on the part of Westerners

toward animals, a societal-wide consensus on ques-tions of the value ofanimals, the extent of theirsuffering during biomed-ical experimentation, andanimal consciousness andself-awareness are lacking.The debate concerninganimal rights and relatedmovements center on thesequestions of the value andsuffering of animals. To betold you are “acting like ananimal” does not reallymean that one’s actions areanimal-like; the commentactually means that theperson is acting outside of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANIMATISM 79

the bounds of the moral behaviors expected of aperson. The debate over the place of animals in ourculturally defined worldview is a deeply emotionalsubject with religious implications for many people,East and West, and one that is unlikely to abate anytime soon.

— Linda D. Wolfe

Further Readings

Gould, S. J. (Ed.). (2001). The book of life. New York:Norton.

http://www.sidwell.edu/us/science/vlb5/Labs/Classification_Lab/Eukarya/Animalia/

http://waynesword.palomar.edu/trnov01.htmhttp://www.agen.ufl.edu/~chyn/age2062/lect/lect_19/

phyla.htmIngold, T. (Ed.). (1988). What is an animal? London:

Unwin & Hyman.Margulis, L., & Sagan, D. (1995). What is life?

Berkeley: University of California Press.Mitchell, R. W., Thompson, N. S., & Miles, H. L.

(Eds.). (1997). Anthropomorphism, anecdotes,and animals. Albany: State University of New YorkPress.

Strickberger, M. W. (2000). Evolution (3rd ed.).Boston: Jones & Bartlett.

4 ANIMATISM

Animatism is the belief that inanimate, magicalqualities exist in the natural world. Specifically, it isthe attribution of consciousness, personality, andcommon life force, but not of individuality, to phe-nomena observable in the natural universe. The ani-matistic force can be an innate part of objects, such astrees or rocks, or embedded in observable phenom-ena, such as thunder, lightning, and earthquakes. Tobe animatistic, such forces need be both supernaturaland, most important, impersonal. The term anima-tism was first coined by Robert Marett (1899) inresponse to E. B. Tylor’s (1871) well-known descrip-tion of animism as a form of religion used by earlyhumans and their modern “primitive” counterpartsto explain the universe by personifying all phenom-ena with animate power. Tylor’s animism was a spiri-tual force, akin to a soul, both animate and with a

distinctive personality, that embodied all things inthe universe and was responsible for giving life toanimate being. Both terms derive from the Latinanima, meaning “soul.”

The concept of an animate yet impersonal super-natural force was first described in Melanesian by themissionary R. H. Codrington in 1891. Marett adoptedthis concept for anthropology, publishing it as anima-tism in 1909. Like Tylor, he viewed these types ofbelief systems as primitive forms of religion in whichhumans do not conceive of personal souls, butinstead see external forces or phenomena as beingresponsible for animating the world in which humanslive. He assumed, as did Tylor, that in the study ofsuch beliefs rested clues as to the origins of religion.Drawing further distinctions between animatisticsocieties and the West, Marett considered practition-ers of these “primitive” religions to be actors withoutthe modern capacity of thought, saying that theirreligion developed under psychological and sociolog-ical conditions that favored emotional and motorprocesses, not ideation. Anthropologists have com-monly used these early foundations to discriminatebetween spiritual beings with individual personalities(animism) and impersonal supernatural forces(animatism). In most animistic societies, however,there is no clear differentiation between personalspiritual beings and impersonal forces. More com-monly, people perceive these powers existing side byside and interacting with each other. Spirits fre-quently possess practitioners of animistic beliefs orthese practitioners receive information from spiritsthat indicate which spiritual powers are causing sick-ness or catastrophe.

— Keith M. Prufer

See also Animism; Religion and Anthropology; ReligiousRituals

Further Readings

Codrington, R. H. (1891). The Melanesians. Oxford:Clarendon.

Marett, R. (1899). Preanimistic Religion. Folk-Lore,2, 1–28.

Marett, R. (1909). The threshold of religion. Methuen:London.

Tylor, E. B. (1871). Primitive culture. London:J. Murray.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANIMISM80

4 ANIMISM

The ultimate source of the term animism is the Latinword, anima, meaning spirit, soul, or life force. Incontemporary anthropology, animism is the genericterm for numerous and diverse religions focused onthe belief that nature includes spirits, sacred forces, andsimilar extraordinary phenomena. This is reflected inthe classic minimal definition of religion, a belief inspiritual beings, that was originally formulated by thefamous British anthropologist Sir Edward BurnettTylor in his 1871 book Primitive Cultures. Tylorviewed animism as the basis of all religions and theearliest stage in the evolution of religion. Animismremains relevant to considerations regarding suchelemental conceptual dualities as animal and human,nature and culture, natural and supernatural, inani-mate and animate, body and mind, and life and death.

In general, animists believe that supernatural forcesinhabit animals, plants, rocks, and other objects innature. These forces are envisioned as spirits or souls.While they may or may not be personified, often theyare categorized as male or female. They can influencehuman affairs for better or worse. In turn, humansmay influence them to some degree through appro-priate rituals and offerings, especially by ritual spe-cialists such as shamans and priests.

Given its spatial and temporal extent, animismqualifies as the great, major, or world religion, asopposed to Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Islam,or Judaism, even though it is often omitted frombooks on comparative religion. The antiquity ofanimism appears to extend back to the time of theNeandertals some 70,000 years ago. At a cave calledShanidar in northern Iraq, archaeologists found someof the earliest evidence of intentional burials, togetherwith offerings such as red ocher and even flowers, thelatter revealed by pollen remains. In sharp contrast,other religions are relatively recent, having developedwithin just the last few thousand years.

Geographically, animism is the most widespread ofall religions. It was the religion of the hunter-gatherers,who inhabited most of the terrestrial surface of thisplanet until the advent of farming, around 10,000years ago. To this day, animism persists as the onlyreligion in many foraging, farming, and pastoral cul-tures. Furthermore, it also forms a substratum ofpopular religion in many other societies, even thoughthey identify with one or more of the so-called great

religions. For example, Asians often embrace elementsof animism in their personal religion, along withmainstream religions such as Buddhism, Hinduism,or Islam. Thus, in Japan, Shintoism and Buddhismcoexist and often commingle, and the former is avariety of animism. Neo-paganism in contemporaryEurope, North America, and elsewhere is also a vari-ant of animism. Some form of animism is still foundin about half of the nearly 7,000 cultures in the worldtoday.

Animism permeates much of human life and nature.As an illustration, rice is one of the most importantfood and cash crops in the world. However, in itsAsian homelands, rice is not merely a material entityfor nourishment, and it cannot be adequately under-stood only as such. In addition, it is associated withthe spiritual dimension of life, and in particular, theso-called rice goddess, along with an elaborate com-plex of ritualistic, symbolic, and artistic expressions.

Another specific example of animism is the Thaibelief in spirits that inhabit a place. Most homes andother buildings in Thailand have a separate littlespirit house. It provides shelter for the spirit thatwas displaced by the construction of the humanbuilding. On a daily basis, offerings are placed in thespirit house, including water, fruit, candles, incense,and/or flowers. There are millions of such spirit housesthroughout the country, where most people are other-wise to some degree Buddhist.

Beyond its prior antiquity, universality, and ubiq-uity, animism is also important because arguably itis far more natural than any other religion. Mostindigenous societies that pursue animism are rela-tively sustainable ecologically, a point that should beobvious if one considers their existence for centuries,or even millennia, in the same region without causingresource depletion and environmental degradation toan irreversible degree. In these kinds of societies,nature is not merely a biophysical reality or economicresource, but more important, it is intrinsically spiri-tual. In other words, most indigenes do not rigidlysegregate the natural and supernatural, but view spir-its as part of the intricate and mysterious web of life.Probably the respect and reverence afforded naturebecause of its sacredness contributes significantly tothe sustainability of these societies.

Given the temporal and spatial extent of animism,it is apparently an elemental part of human nature,and thus likely to persist indefinitely. Its ecologicalresonance may also contribute to its persistence.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE 81

As such, it deserves much more recognition andappreciation than it has been afforded in the past.

— Leslie E. Sponsel

See also Animatism; Cosmology and Sacred Landscapes;Religion and Anthropology; Religious Rituals

Further Readings

Albanese, C. L. (2002). Reconsidering nature religion.Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International.

Crosby, D. A. (2002). A religion of nature. Albany:State University of New York Press.

Formoso, B. (Ed.). (1996). The link with nature anddivine mediations in Asia. Providence, RI:Berghahn Books.

Grim, J. A. (Ed.). (2001). Indigenous traditions andecology: The interconnections of cosmology andcommunity. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UniversityPress.

Harvey, G. (1997). Contemporary paganism.Washington Square, NY: New York UniversityPress.

Lane, B. C. (2001). Landscapes of the sacred: Geographyand narrative in American spirituality. Baltimore,MD: Johns Hopkins Press.

McFadden, S. (1991). Profiles in wisdom: Native eldersspeak about the earth. Santa Fe, NM: Bear & Co.

Narby, J., & Francis Huxley, F. (Eds.). (2001). Shamansthrough time: 500 Years on the path to knowledge.New York: Tarcher/Putnam.

4 ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE

The anthropic (or, literally, human-centered) princi-ple entails several propositions, all focusing on therelationship, if any, between the natural physical uni-verse and the existence of human beings in this uni-verse. It grew out of discussions in astronomy andcosmology, where some argued that the existence oflife in the universe automatically set constraints onhow the universe could possibly exist and how it gotto be this way since the Big Bang.

There are several versions of the argument. All aretied together, however, by the fact that the laws ofphysics and the physical constants as they stand nowall allow for complex life to occur, or perhaps for auniverse to even exist at all. For example (assuming all

other forces remained the same), if the gravitationalconstant G—the strength of the pull of gravity of oneobject on another—were just a little more than it is,stars would burn out more quickly, fighting againstthe force of attraction trying to make them collapse.They might burn out even before there was enoughtime for intelligent life to evolve and notice them.Also, atoms could not form if electrons weighed a littlemore or protons a little less, and without atoms, noth-ing in the universe, alive or not, would be as we knowit. The famous quantum physicist Paul Dirac was alsopuzzled by the apparent large number of coincidencesthat occur between the different dimensionless con-stants. Martin Rees, Britain’s royal astronomer, arguesthat only a half-dozen numbers make the universe theway it is, and a difference in any one of them would nothave allowed it to even come into existence.

These are all versions of the “weak anthropic princi-ple,” which claims that all the laws of the universe arenot equally probable, but the fact that we are here toobserve them implies that the laws that are in effectexist because we are here to observe them. What somehave asserted as the “Goldilocks principle”—that is, theuniversal porridge is “just right” for us—asserts thatthe universe must have only those properties that allowlife to develop, that is, the properties we see in theuniverse today. This is also called the “strong anthropicprinciple” by physical scientists. The strong anthropicprinciple allows for teleogical reasoning: The coinci-dences that allow life to exist must reflect evidence ofan intelligent designer of some kind at work.

In anthropology, there have not been many attemptsto address the anthropic principle directly, and thosethat have tried to do so have not been especially enlight-ening. Discussions of the anthropic principle come upin debates on evolution versus creationism or intelligentdesign, but once again, the anthropological contribu-tions have been minimal. Perhaps linguistic anthropol-ogy might offer some future insights. There might be alanguage effect taking place in these discussions. Evenif a strong Sapir-Whorf effect can never be demon-strated, it is impossible to address the universe in waysthat are not already guided by our preconceptions ofit—outlooks largely determined by the ways we talk andthink about it. Thus, the whole issue of the anthropicprinciple might ultimately be an artifact of ourperceptions—perceptions guided largely by language.

— James Stanlaw

See also Big Bang Theory

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPO CENTRISM82

Further Readings

Barrow, J. (1990). The world within the world. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Barrow, J., & Tipler, F. (1986). The anthropiccosmological principle. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Bostrom, N. (2002). Anthropic bias: Observationselection effects in science and philosophy. London:Routledge.

Rees, M. (2000). Just six numbers: The deep forces thatshape the universe. New York: Basic Books.

Santangelo, A. (2001). The anthropic grounds toculture (plus Addendum, 2002). Milan, Italy:Editrice Sabaini.

4 ANTHROPOCENTRISM

The term anthropocentrism indicates a point of viewthat accords to the human being (anthropos in Greek)the central place, the one of the highest importance,around which everything else gravitates. This ten-dency, implying an overevaluation of the human racecompared to other forms of life, is particularly mani-fest in two fields: cosmology and philosophy.

Cosmological Anthropocentrism

In the Old Testament, common sacred text forJudaism and Christianism, in the book of the Genesis,where is related the creation of the world by divineactivity, the human being is the last one to see thelight of life and the only one to come out of theCreator’s hands as His own “image.” Moreover, Godgives Man the authority to “rule over” every othercreature living in water, in the air or on the ground(Genesis 1:26–29). This fundamental belief of thenatural superiority and domination accorded to thehuman beings from the very beginning by the divineCreator himself has lead to an anthropocentric visionof the world for the cultures following the above-mentioned religions.

It is noteworthy that Man doesn’t occupy such aprivileged position in any other religious cosmogoni-cal tradition. The modern scientific thesis of CharlesDarwin (1809–1882), defending the evolution of allnatural species, considers the human being as one

animal among the others, which explains the harshmetaphysical opposition, which still goes on, betweenthe evolutionists and the Christian theologists whointerpret their sacred texts literally (although repre-sentatives of many official churches have declaredsince the end of the 19th century that they don’tconsider Darwin’s theory as contradicting their owndoctrines).

We would like to underline also that despite thediversity concerning the origins and the “naturalplace” of man in the world, both theories accept theactual final issue of the human condition: There areparticularities in the human species (especially linkedto handcraft abilities and to intellectual faculties)that gave us the possibility of an extraordinary expan-sion, often by chasing or by subjugating many othernatural species.

In fact, the “privilege of domination” (be itaccorded by a divine will or by a mechanical naturaldevelopment) over the other living creatures of theEarth presented a negative side for a great part ofhuman societies: the feeling of difference and alien-ation from the whole. Man, especially in the Westerncivilizations, became progressively a “stranger” forthe natural environment. The opposition betweenthe notions of “nature” and “culture” emerged. Acertain nostalgia must have remained, expressedsymbolically in many myths, traditions, and beliefsrelating a lost original human condition of happyand unconscious unity with all parts of nature,inspiring a wish of “eternal return.”

Concretely, the human attitude toward the otherliving species and the natural environment in generalhas largely followed during the last centuries a strictand ignorant anthropocentrism, which has led toinconsiderate destruction of the natural environ-ment, in favor of the human profit. It is only duringthe last decades that human beings have recognizedthe great ecological problems they have created, asituation for which we may still suffer the conse-quences in the long term. Under the light of thisnew understanding, we may say that the necessityof certain changes in the anthropocentric way ofbehaving toward the other components of the planethas started to become an inescapable evidence.

Philosophical Anthropocentrism

It is in fact difficult to define among the philosophicaltheories those that may be qualified as properly

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY AND BUSINESS 83

anthropocentric, as the limits between “anthropocen-trism” and “humanism” become vague, accordingto the way one defines each notion. After makinghere an obligatory personal choice, let us keep thesame general definition, already mentioned, for“anthropocentrism” and distinguish it from “human-ism” by the following characteristic: We accept that“humanism” considers the value of human being asindependent (a value “by itself”) and is guided by therespect of this value; this doesn’t necessarily imply theexclusive accordance of the highest importance to thehuman being compared with other beings or values, asis the case of the “anthropocentric” theories.

The Sophists were the first thinkers to put Man inthe center of their world vision, during the 5th cen-tury BC. The most representative fragment of theiranthropocentrism is the one attributed to Protagorasof Abdera (490–420 BC): “Man is the measure of allthings.” This principle legitimated pure subjectivityand relativity for all metaphysical, ethical, and politi-cal values.

Socrates (470–399 BC) and Plato (428–348 BC)firmly rejected the sophistic position, which covereda certain political opportunism, without any effortto further explore the human being himself and hisrelation to the world. This task was undertaken bySocrates himself, who is thus considered the founderof “philosophical anthropology.”

In the history of occidental philosophy, there havebeen afterward various theories that have advancedsubjectivism as the “anthropocentric” principle ofhuman knowledge. We can’t cite them here all indetail, but let us give only as representative examplesthe subjective idealism of Johann Gottlieb Fichte(1762–1814) and the existentialism of Jean-PaulSartre (1905–1980).


Further Readings

Diels, H., & Kranz, W. (1996). Protagoras. DieFragmente der Vorsokratiker (Vol. II, Sec. 80.pp. 253–271). Zurich: Weidmann.

Fichte, I. H. (Ed.). (1971). Fichtes werke (11 vols.).(Reprint of the 19th-century edition). Berlin:Walter de Gruyter.

Sartre, J.-P. (1996). L’existentialisme est un humanisme[Existentialism is a humanism]. Paris: Gallimard.(Original work published 1946)

4 ANTHROPOLOGY AND BUSINESS

Business and industry are fundamental ways of orga-nizing economic activity to meet basic human needsin modern market societies. Business means the buy-ing and selling of goods and services in the market-place (also known as commerce or trade), whileindustry refers to the organized production of goodsand services on a large scale. When we use these termsin the anthropological context (for example, businessor industrial anthropology), we may refer to one ormore of the three major domains of anthropologicalresearch and practice in the private sector. Theseinclude

anthropology related to the process of producing goodsand services and to the corporate organizations inwhich production takes place

ethnographically informed design of new products,services, and systems for consumers and businesses

anthropology related to the behavior of consumers andthe marketplace.

The term business anthropology came into usage inthe 1980s, when anthropologists became full-time,nonacademic practitioners in niches related to con-sumer behavior and marketing. Prior to that time, wemore frequently used the terms industrial anthropol-ogy, anthropology of work, or applied anthropology inindustry to denote areas of research and practice thatfocused on business-related phenomenon. Morerecently, we have begun to more generically use theterm business anthropology to mean any application ofanthropology to business-oriented problems.

Part I: Historical Development of the Field

Early Colonial History

Anthropological roots that trace back to Europeancolonial interests also connect, albeit indirectly, to theinternational trade of that era and the commercialactivities associated with such trade. Early in the 19thcentury, for example, the Court of Directors of theEast India Company made a formal decision toacquire anthropological knowledge of India, as suchknowledge was deemed to be of great value in theadministration of the country. Subsequently, FrancesBuchanan was appointed by the Governor-General in

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY AND BUSINESS84

Council to undertake an ethnographic survey toinquire into the conditions of the inhabitants ofBengal and their religion. Likewise, in Nigeria, wherethe British government employed a National Anthro-pologist for research purposes, the journal Africa wasestablished in 1928 to harmonize research policy andpractice in the colonies “for the solution of pressingquestions that are of concern to (among others) . . .traders working for the good of Africa,” according toLord Lugard, the first governor general of Nigeria inhis article in the first issue of Africa. These tradersincluded Lever Brothers and John Holts, companiesthat secured the produce of the colonies for Britishfactories and in turn shipped the finished products tothe colonies.

While the actual value of European anthropologyto colonial interests has been called into question,there was, at least, sufficient potential there to justifythe funding of a Colonial Social Science ResearchCouncil (CSSRC) in Great Britain from 1944 to 1962,an organization that advocated a practical researchagenda for anthropology in the colonies. It is,perhaps, not a coincidence that during this sameperiod—the 1950s—British industrialists, led byIsrael Sieff (a cofounder of Marks and Spencer, adepartment store chain), requested support fromBritish anthropologists to deal with quite differentissues in England, for example, staff relationships andproductivity in corporations. The industrialists wererebuffed, however, with the reply that anthropologywas an exploratory discipline and thus could not beused for anything so concrete as recommendations tobusinesses. The relationship between anthropologyand colonial interests is part of the world history ofapplied anthropology and is one of the reasons whyEuropean anthropologists were slow to adopt appliedanthropology as a formal area of research and gradu-ate training in the latter half of the 20th century. Thekind of work supported by the CSSRC becametainted with political incorrectness as independencemovements grew in force around the time of WorldWar II, causing embarrassment for some anthropolo-gists who found themselves linked to colonial purposes.As a result, many European anthropologists threw the“applied baby” out with the bathwater, and applica-tion simply was off-limits in many places until the lastquarter of the 20th century. The mantle of leadershipin application consequently “jumped the pond” to theUnited States—the home of pragmatic philosophy,with important implications for the relationship

between business and American anthropology in the20th century and beyond.

The American Context

On the other side of the Atlantic, the United Stateswas experiencing its industrial revolution duringthe latter part of the 19th century, and, with it, thefocus of applied anthropology shifted from studies ofNative Americans to research based in industry. Therise of American industry was accompanied by atheory of organization known as scientific manage-ment developed by the engineer Frederick W. Taylorand implicitly in force in today’s corporations.According to Taylor, the activities of both workersand managers should be determined by “scientific”methods—thorough investigation of the skills andactions needed to perform a given role, careful selec-tion of individual workers and managers based ontheir ability to perform the role, and detailed instruc-tions that would direct each employee’s behaviorso that maximum output could be achieved withminimum input. Taylor believed in the theory of“economic man”—that individual employees wouldrespond rationally to economic rewards by increasingtheir productivity to maximize rewards to themselves.The trick was to find exactly the right kind andamount of incentive—sufficient to motivate theworker effectively but not so generous as to detractfrom profitability. This approach, he believed, wouldreduce labor-management strife, as all actors wouldbe satisfied with their situations.

Taylor didn’t have to worry about unions interfer-ing with his plan to optimize the productivity of theworkforce. Prior to the 1930s, manufacturing compa-nies did not have industrial unions, as many did lateron in the 20th century. American unions were orga-nized along trade lines (for example, carpenters,glassblowers, shoemakers) rather than by industry(such as automobiles, steel, textiles). This reflected thecraft-based organization of production common atthat time in which skilled workers with deep knowl-edge and experience in all aspects of a particular craftmade products by hand. This manual process yieldshigh-quality products, but it is slow and not suitedto mass production for large national markets. Craftworkers used trade unions to maintain some measureof control over the conditions under which theyworked—such as who could join the trade, how theywould be trained, what they would be paid. Suchtrade unions were much like medieval guilds.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


The less skilled production workers of the growingmanufacturing firms were not permitted to join tradeunions. As manufacturing companies expanded inscope and influence toward the end of the 19th andbeginning of the 20th centuries, their managers verymuch wanted to keep unions from organizing the lessskilled production workers. The 19th century had beena period of serious labor-management conflict in theUnited States, with members of trade unions regularlygoing on strike against their employers and violencesometimes breaking out. These strikes were not legal,and union members often clashed with private securityguards, state militia, and even federal troops. Peoplewere sometimes killed in these struggles. BecauseAmerican workers did not yet have a federal law ensur-ing the right to form a union, workers could bearrested and charged with crimes such as conspiracy.

As industrial technology began to replace the skillsof the craft workers, managers looked forward to theday when the trade unions would decline in influence,which they soon did. Managers were still concerned,however, that the less skilled production workers, whowere becoming more numerous as national marketsfor mass-produced goods expanded, would organizeunions of their own, something they wanted to avoidat all costs.

One effective approach to avoiding unionizationwas a benign theory of management known as welfarecapitalism, an ideology that became central to thefuture relationship of business and anthropology. Thehypothesis was that if management treated the workerswell and ensured that they were contented, labor strifewould subside and unions would not grow stronger.This approach was especially prominent during theeconomic boom years of the 1920s, when employersspent money improving workers’ quality of life. Theybuilt new housing for workers, created flower beds,parks, and libraries and set up elementary schools forthe workers’ children. Management also formed com-pany unions that negotiated “sweetheart deals” (forexample, union leaders were treated very well, and theyagreed to whatever management wanted). As a result ofthese efforts by management, the union movement didnot advance in the 1920s, and there was a reign of rela-tive peace in the ranks of less skilled industrial workersup to the time of the stock market crash in 1929.

The Hawthorne Project

It is against this backdrop that the Western ElectricCompany (now part of Lucent Technologies) began

in 1924 at its Hawthorne Works near Chicago a seriesof experiments aimed at increasing the productivityof the workforce. These experiments reflected boththe influence of welfare capitalism and FrederickTaylor’s scientific management movement. The com-pany wanted to find out how to improve workingconditions so that worker fatigue and dissatisfactionwould be reduced (welfare capitalism), and theybelieved that a single variable (such as factory illumi-nation) could be manipulated to make this happen(scientific management). In these particular experi-ments, however, the results did not make sense fromthe standpoint of scientific management theory.The experimenters found that worker productivityincreased when the lights were made brighter (asexpected), but productivity also increased or stayedthe same when lighting was decreased, even to thedim level of moonlight. This result definitely wasnot expected, and could not be explained by theprevailing theory of the time.

Intrigued, the Hawthorne researchers instigated afurther series of tests to explore the anomaly, one ofwhich was called the Relay Assembly Test Room(RATR) experiment. In this test, a group of womenwere isolated in a laboratory where their conditionsof work and output could be measured carefully. Theexperimenters then varied the working conditions,giving the women rest breaks, snacks, incentive pay,and then gradually withdrawing each of these, whilethey measured the number of relay assemblies eachwoman produced. Again, the same mysterious resultsemerged—productivity was sustained or increasedno matter what the experimenters did to workingconditions. We now know this phenomenon as theHawthorne Effect, meaning that nonexperimentalvariables are affecting the experimental results, but atthe time the outcome was inexplicable.

Hawthorne researchers called upon Harvardpsychologist Elton Mayo to help them interpret themysterious results of their experiments. With hishelp, they came to realize that they had inadvertentlyaltered the working conditions of the women farbeyond those of a normal work environment. Forexample, the researchers themselves had become thewomen’s supervisors and had developed a congenialrelationship with their research subjects. Two womenwho were not cooperative in the project had beenreplaced with two other women. Neither of these con-ditions paralleled those that might be experienced onthe shop floor. Further, the women themselves had

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


developed an esprit de corps in which they workedtogether as a team, encouraging and helping oneanother if one fell behind. This is, at least, the officialversion of the research team after members settledinternal disputes regarding the appropriate interpreta-tion of the data. Richard Gillespie’s 1991 ManufacturingKnowledge: A History of the Hawthorne Experimentsilluminates the differing interpretations amongHawthorne researchers and explains how Mayo’sviews came to dominate the social science lore.

In Mayo’s views, the women had developed adistinctive social system, and this system itself hadbecome part of the production process and was nodoubt contributing to the enhanced level of produc-tivity that was being observed in the experiment.Now, rather than simply being interested in how onevariable (illumination) influenced another (fatigue),the Hawthorne researchers started to become inter-ested in understanding the relationships amongvariables in the social system and what their effectson production might be.

As discussed by Helen Schwartzman in Ethno-graphy in Organizations, Hawthorne initiated in 1928a massive interview project involving 20,000 employ-ees, aimed at obtaining a better understanding ofpsychological factors that affected the workers. Itwas these interviews that uncovered the tendencyof workers to band together as a means of defenseagainst anything that might be perceived as a threat.This tendency produced a uniformity of behavioramong individual workers, for example, reluctance toask for a raise, which might create a rift within a workgroup. This tendency gradually came to be conceptu-alized as the worker’s social system or social organiza-tion, and it was an interest in understanding thissocial system that prompted the next and final phaseof the Hawthorne project.

It was at this point that anthropology enteredthe Hawthorne project. Elton Mayo had establisheda friendship with two prominent anthropologists,Bronislaw Malinowski and A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, andhe therefore knew that anthropologists study naturalsocial systems in the field. It was this very approachthat Mayo wanted to adopt for the final phase of theHawthorne study. Through his professional network,Mayo was introduced to one of Radcliffe-Brown’sstudents, W. Lloyd Warner, who had just returnedfrom fieldwork in Australia, studying the Murngin.Warner consulted with the Hawthorne researchers indesigning and conducting the next phase of their

experiment, and with this act he fathered industrialor organizational anthropology.

With W. Lloyd Warner as design consultant, theHawthorne researchers conducted the final phaseof the Hawthorne project, known as the Bank WiringObservation Room (BWOR) experiment. This por-tion of the project was aimed at exploring what work-ers actually did on the job, in contrast with what theysaid during the interviews. For the BWOR, a replica ofthe shop floor at Western Electric was constructed,into which a typical work group (14 male bank wirersand their supervisors) was installed. The workers per-formed their tasks as usual while a trained observerwatched them and recorded their interactions over atime period extending for several months during1931 and 1932, the depths of the Great Depression. Togain a better understanding of the worker’s point ofview, a second researcher, not present in the observa-tion room, conducted periodic interviews with theworkers. Warner encouraged the researchers to readanthropological theory and to analyze their observa-tional data much as an anthropologist would instudying a small society such as a band or tribe.

The BWOR study was the first to demonstrateempirically the starkly contrasting points of view sep-arating management and the workers. Hawthornemanagement had accepted Frederick Taylor’s conceptof “economic man” (that is, workers are rationalactors who respond to economic incentives), andtherefore they had devised a complex piece rateincentive scheme that guaranteed a minimum hourlywage in exchange for a minimum daily standard ofproduction (the “bogey”), plus an additional sumthat was determined by the amount of output pro-duced by the entire group in excess of that whichwas guaranteed by the minimum hourly wage.Management believed that this system would encour-age workers to maximize their efforts up to the pointat which fatigue and discomfort inhibited additionalproduction. Part of this incentive scheme was thenotion that slower workers would be spurred on bythose in the group who worked faster (much as theywitnessed in the earlier RATR experiment).

In reality, however, the piece rate system had exactlythe opposite effect to what the managers envisioned.Workers had their own notion of a “fair day’s work”that was considerably below that which managementenvisioned as desirable under the piece rate incentivesystem. The workers’ informal standard was trans-lated into a certain number of units to be produced

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


by each man during the day; this was basically theamount of labor required to produce the bogey.Anything produced in excess of this minimum wasfrowned upon and negatively sanctioned by thegroup. If a worker set a fast pace and produced morethan the minimum standard, he was subjected toverbal abuse (for example, called a slave), “binging”(using the thumb to snap the third finger againstthe violator’s arm), and eventually, the most dreadedpunishment—ostracism or virtual banishment. Oftenthe workers would produce their quota early in theday and then subtly scale back effort in the after-noon while enjoying one another’s company (all thewhile keeping an eye out for management). This workculture arose from the workers’ belief that a higherdaily rate of production would prompt managementto raise the bogey, cut the hourly rate, or lay off someof them. The Hawthorne project was conductedduring the depths of the Great Depression, so it is notsurprising that workers feared such actions frommanagement.

The Hawthorne findings were in conflict with theexisting management theory of the day. According toTaylor, the economic man was an individual, andincentive structures were set to encourage individualsto give their maximum effort and to push their peersto do the same. Yet in the BWOR, the workers did notrespond as individuals but as a group, and they haddeveloped their own informal theory of managementthat was based on distrust of managers, not on aninterest in economic gain. Here was the first solidempirical evidence of informal organization (what wemight call an occupational subculture or counter-culture), defined as the actual patterns of social inter-action and relationships among the members of anorganization that are not determined by manage-ment. Researchers were able to map this informalorganization by quantifying interactions amongworkers and to graphically depict networks of rela-tionships between different work groups or cliques,much as network analysis today reveals informal pat-terns of communication and exchange among indi-viduals. The informal organization that was depictedvery much contrasted with the formal organization(interactions defined by the rules and policies of thecorporation) that management had put in place toenable pursuit of the company’s goals. The corpora-tion thus was comprised of two kinds of organizationthat were not aligned with each other—one a rationalorganization designed for instrumental purposes,

and the other a spontaneous, natural form of humansocial interaction that arose in response to inherenthuman interests and needs. These findings made clearthat workers were not simply “factors” in production,much like machines, but were sentient beings whoassigned their own meanings to phenomenon andwho protected their interests through mechanisms oftheir own design. Although this insight seems obvi-ous to us now, it was a startling breakthrough in theearly 1930s, and it represented a severe critique ofTaylor’s scientific management theory.

One of the most significant findings to emergefrom the Hawthorn project was that workers exertconsiderable influence over industrial productivity.As long as machines did not control the work process,as they did not in those days, workers could manipu-late the pace of production in many subtle ways noteasy to detect without an army of supervisors.Management was no longer fully in control of thecorporation, as the theory of the day assumed, buthad to deal with a powerful natural force that, frommanagement’s perspective, did not respond to thelogic of economic incentives. From the worker’s pointof view, of course, the men of the BWOR were beingquite logical, since any behavioral pattern other thanthat which they exhibited could end up costing themin the long run. Interestingly, this latter anthropolog-ical view is not the one adopted by the Hawthorneresearchers, who accepted Mayo’s interpretation ofthe findings, which held that the BWOR workers wereacting in an irrational manner, based on psychologi-cal “maladjustment.” A different industrial future mayhave unfolded if the alternative view had prevailed.

A new school of thought emerged in organizationaltheory as a result of the Hawthorne findings, and itheld sway for the next two decades—the HumanRelations School. This school of thought was based onfunctional equilibrium theory, a theory widespread inthe social sciences at the time, which viewed humanorganizations as integrated social systems, with spe-cific structures that interacted to maintain a smoothlyoperating whole. Each individual was seen as beingtied to the whole yet still having his or her properplace and function in the system. Within the contextof this theory, conflict between management andworkers was seen as pathological, reflecting the dis-ruption of an equilibrium state, and was to be ame-liorated by making adjustments in the pattern ofinteraction among individuals and organizationalstructures. A disruption of the equilibrium state

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


would affect worker morale in a negative way, andthis in turn would interfere with efficient production.The Human Relations School aimed at creating har-monious worker-manager relationships that wouldensure optimal productivity in a company (some latercalled this “cow sociology”—contented workers givebetter work). Mayo argued that a work group’s infor-mal organization either could support managementgoals (as seen in the RATR) or work against them (asin the BWOR). Management needed to adjust its rela-tionships with workers to ensure the former result,not the latter. This school of thought was prominentin American industry for the next 20 years and washighly influential in shaping the practices of the firstgeneration of industrial anthropologists.

Not coincidentally, the Human Relations Schooloften is associated with welfare capitalism and with atendency in managerial thought and action to resistunionization of the workforce. The anthropologistswho were prominent within the Human Relationsmovement appear not to have questioned the statusquo ante assumptions upon which this movementwas founded, and consequently they and their col-leagues often have been judged as management-centric in their research and practice, a judgment thatmay not be completely fair, given the anthropologists’landmark efforts to understand the perspective of theHawthorne workers.

The Human Relations Movement

Ironically, Warner and his colleagues did not havefurther opportunity to continue their studies atHawthorne during the 1930s. This was the result oftwo developments. First, the Hawthorne researchersfollowed up on the BWOR study by initiating a pro-gram of psychological counseling with workers thatthey believed would contribute to industrial peace.No further studies of social interaction on the shopfloor were conducted (while industrial psychologyas a field expanded). Second, as the Great Depressionunfolded in the 1930s, severe economic deprivationmeant that companies did not have the resourcesneeded to continue to support research of theHawthorne type. Thus, little industrial anthropologywas conducted in the United States during theremainder of the 1930s.

As the United States recovered from the GreatDepression and then entered World War II, produc-tion pressure intensified and internecine “feuding”between workers and management erupted once

again, becoming an increasingly serious threat to theeconomic welfare and security of the nation. Anyeffort to ameliorate this conflict was viewed as con-tributing to important national goals. Intellectualswere motivated to become involved in Mayo’s HumanRelations project primarily because of such criticalnational interests and not as a result of concern for thecompetitiveness or profitability of individual firms.

The group of anthropologists at Harvard duringthe time of the Hawthorne project also was influencedby a general interest in modern institutions, and theyfound many opportunities to conduct observationalstudies in large corporations and to apply theirinsights toward the goal of industrial harmony, fromthe 1940s through the 1950s. This generation of indus-trial anthropologists, including Conrad Arensberg,Elliot Chapple, Burleigh Gardner, Robert Guest,Solon Kimball, Frederick Richardson, Leonard Sayles,and William Foote Whyte (who was trained as a qual-itative sociologist), undertook a series of importantstudies both of workers and managers, with the goalof discovering factors and forces that could be manip-ulated to achieve an equilibrium state in the organiza-tional system (that is, the elimination of conflict).

Anthropologists who worked in industry duringthis period continued to be influenced by Elton Mayo’sconception of social science as therapeutic or clinicalpractice. In keeping with functional equilibriumtheory, Mayo believed that a key role of social science,including anthropology, was to gain a better under-standing of human social systems in industry in orderto permit the design of effective interventions thatcould alleviate pathologies such as labor-managementconflict, resulting in more smoothly functioningorganizational systems. If a social system was not inan equilibrium state, the anthropologists believedthat they could contribute to restoring a healthy equi-librium by identifying sources of friction in the socialsystem and recommending ways to transform adver-sarial or rebellious relations into productive collabo-ration. The anthropologists did not question theasymmetrical relations of power in a company as akey source of conflict; these were taken as given.

During the 1940s and 1950s, anthropologists werehired by management to work on problems in specificplants, such as high turnover, absenteeism, strikes, andpoor worker-management cooperation. They studiedvarious aspects of social structure and relationswithin the industrial enterprise, such as informalrelationships among workers, actual work processes,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


status hierarchies, relations between workers andmanagers, union-management interaction, and vol-untary associations in the workplace. Many of thesestudies identified the small work group as a criticalfactor within the industrial system, thus opening anew area of study in the social sciences that has beenhighly productive from a theoretical standpoint.

Companies that hired anthropologists during thisperiod included Sears, Roebuck & Company, theContainer Corporation of America, InternationalBusiness Machines (IBM), Inland Steel ContainerCompany, Libby MacNeil and Libby, Bundy TubingCompany, and the Eastern Corporation. Some ofthe anthropological studies of such firms producedindustrial ethnographies (case studies) of the entirecompany, with a focus on the factors and forces thatinfluenced human relations within an integratedsocial system. For example, Warner and Low con-ducted their famous case study of a major industrialstrike in Yankee City (Newbury, Massachusetts),explaining connections between the social systemwithin the factory and larger economic, technological,and social forces that contributed to the strike. Yet theanthropologists saw themselves not as hired guns butas scientists, working to discover laws of human inter-action that could establish the foundation for a scienceof human behavior. W. Lloyd Warner, the founder ofindustrial anthropology, had a larger theoretical agendathat he hoped to advance through the study of moderninstitutions, such as industrial organizations.

Methodologically, Eliot Chapple and other anthro-pologists aimed to obtain a detailed, quantitativerecord of interactions among workers and managersin industrial settings, much as a naturalist wouldrecord the behavior of an animal species in the field.Detailed measurement of actual behavioral interac-tion would help to pinpoint the sources of tensionand conflict between different industrial roles. Thisknowledge could then be used to make precise adjust-ments in patterns of interaction that could contributeto a reduction in conflict. Chapple developed a newtechnological device, called the Interaction Chrono-graph, which helped to record quantitatively theinteractions among individuals as they unfolded inreal time. This device may be viewed as the precursorof modern videotape analysis of workplace interac-tion that was later pioneered by a second generationof industrial anthropologists.

Frederick Richardson’s work provides an example ofa key social variable—the human contact—discovered

by the anthropologists through observational methods,and describes how this variable could be used toimprove worker-manager relations. The contact per-tains to the behavioral interaction that takes placebetween a supervisor and his or her subordinate inface-to-face meetings. Richardson suggests that it ispossible to predict the performance of a work groupsolely by recording the supervisor’s contacts that last1 minute or more. High-performing units display“contact moderation” about 90% of the time. Theanthropologists argued, based on studies of primatesand other animals, that conflict between work groupsis exacerbated by physical separation and a lack ofongoing contact. This behavior pattern is one inwhich a supervisor spends one half to three quartersof his or her time engaged in contacts with others.The contacts are well distributed across the group,with the average length being fairly short, but notcurt. Typically, there are 15 to 30 contacts per day,with a good balance between group and pair contacts.Supervisors of high-performing groups also werefound to be more talkative, more dominant (cannotbe interrupted easily), more flexible in style, and lessflappable. These supervisors over and underreact lessto excessive talking or silence from others, maintain-ing their own rhythm of speech. This description wasderived from close recording of behavioral interac-tions, and it was used to advise managers on ways toimprove the productivity of their workers.

It is clear from the discussion above that industrialanthropologists of the time studied not only workersbut managers as well, something Fredrick Taylor haddifficulty doing, as managers resisted the applicationof his methods to their ranks. Being able to study bothworkers and managers meant that the anthropolo-gists had to gain access to, and establish trust with,both of these groups, a feat that was quite difficult todo in times of industrial unrest. Anthropologists werevirtually the only group of researchers capable of per-forming this feat, although later they were criticizedfor being too close to management in their assump-tions and point of view.

After the Hawthorne project, W. Lloyd Warnershifted his focus to the contemporary community inhis Yankee City studies. The focus of this project wasthe social stratification of a community using theanthropological techniques of direct observation andinterviews. It was in this project that Warner uncov-ered the importance of both the voluntary associationand the corporation as distinctive modes of social

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


integration in American life. Warner found that bothof these forms of organization bring together andarticulate diverse social elements, including individu-als, families, and ethnic groups, in ways that are nottypical in other societies. Anthropologists conductingstudies of families, work, and corporations only noware beginning to follow up on these insights.

Especially important to our understanding ofindustrial anthropology in this period was Warnerand Low’s study of a major strike affecting severalYankee City shoemaking factories. The intensity andduration of the strike, which took place during thedepths of the 1930s Depression, were a surprise tomany observers, since the workers in the plant hadnever mounted any job action in the many decades ofthe factory’s history. Warner and Low were able totrace the roots of the strike to changes in the technol-ogy, work process and social relations within the fac-tory, and they also linked these microlevel changes tolarger technological and economic transformationsunfolding at the macrolevel of the nation. Over somedecades before the strike, shoemaking productiontechnology had gradually evolved, reducing oncehighly skilled craftsmen to less skilled and more inter-changeable workers in a more heavily mechanizedproduction process. The deskilling of the workforcehad destroyed the traditional social system within thefactory, which was based in a hierarchy of increasinglevels of skill in the craft of shoemaking. Workers’identity and self-esteem were tied to their capacity tomove up the skill hierarchy as they gained increasingexperience and expertise. But technological changesdestroyed the skill hierarchy, reducing once proudcraftsmen to a more or less undifferentiated mass ofdeskilled workers. Such changes generated a sense ofloss of control and autonomy among the workers,drawing them into a group with shared interests. Atthe same time, the ownership of the factories them-selves had changed hands, shifting from local owner-ship to distant owners in New York City. Theabsenteeism of the factory owners removed socialconstraints against strikes that had been in placewhen the owners were integral members of the com-munity. As a result, members of the community sup-ported the strike in a way that would not have beenpossible before, and this support made a lengthystrike possible. As a result of the strike and its com-munity support, the workers organized an industrialunion and were successful in their demands againstmanagement, thereby reflecting similar changes that

were taking place across the country. Through thisstudy, Warner and Low showed that behavior inside aplant cannot be understood fully without also know-ing the connections between the plant and its his-torical, social, economic, political, and technologicalcontexts. The discovery of the open-systems nature ofwork organizations was an original theoretical contri-bution that predated Selznick’s work on the TennesseeValley Authority (TVA) that often is credited in themanagement literature as the first research to demon-strate organizational-environmental interactions.

In 1936, Warner left Harvard and went to theUniversity of Chicago, where he founded theCommittee on Human Relations in Industry. Thisgroup encouraged and supported the work of manyindustrial anthropologists and sociologists, such asWilliam Foote Whyte, whose qualitative field studiesof various industries have become classics of theorganizational theory literature. Another significantevent during this period was the founding of theSociety for Applied Anthropology (SfAA) at Harvardin 1941. Several of the founders were industrial anthro-pologists who published their industrial researchfindings in the SfAA’s journal Applied Anthropology(now Human Organization).

The Decline of Industrial Practice

Around 1960, a number of significant changes inthe social, political, and economic context of theUnited States influenced the development of academiaand with it the trajectory of industrial anthropology.Instead of continuing to establish itself as an importantsubfield of anthropology, as might have been projectedfrom its promising start in the previous three decades,the anthropology of industrial organizations entered aprolonged period of decline from which it has onlyrecently begun to emerge. This decline is related bothto a waning interest in modern institutions within themainstream of anthropology and to a scarcity of prac-titioners, that is, individuals who conduct the scienceand craft of anthropology—whether research or appli-cation—inside industrial and business organizations.Possible reasons for the decline might be a change inacademic environments, a shift in social science theory,and political and ethical issues.

Change in Academic Environment

With the end of World War II and the SovietUnion’s launch of Sputnik in the 1950s, major

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


changes swept over American higher education.Record numbers of baby boomers entered college,along with returning GIs, and the ranks of collegestudents exploded in number. Simultaneously, theAmerican government was eager to continue thetechnological advances that had helped the Allies towin the war, and toward that objective the NationalScience Foundation was established to fund academicresearch. These developments meant that academicanthropology, and federal funds for fieldwork incountries outside the United States, grew both innumbers and stature. American anthropologists nowhad growing numbers of academic employment postsand the means to travel abroad to conduct research.The academic discipline of anthropology emphasizedthe significance of fieldwork outside the United Statesas necessary to the creation of a “real anthropologist.”Those conducting research in the United States (suchas the industrial anthropologists) were relegated to asecond-class citizen status, which ultimately pushedmany of them out of anthropology and into the busi-ness world. Some became professors in businessschools (for example, Frederick Richardson, WilliamFoote Whyte, and Leonard Sayles), while othersstarted businesses or became business consultants(for example, Burleigh Gardner and Eliot Chapple).This meant that they were not able to produce a newgeneration of industrial anthropologists.

Shift in Social Science Theory

The Human Relations School and functional equi-librium theory were incompatible with the emerg-ing reality of labor relations in American industry,which was increasingly characterized by severe labor-management conflict and strife. During the GreatDepression, unionism of all kinds declined as unem-ployment grew to unprecedented levels. The moralauthority of business and its capacity to practice wel-fare capitalism were severely damaged, and when aslow recovery began in 1932, the previously harmo-nious labor relations disappeared. Labor agitationmounted as workers were called back to their jobs,and President Franklin D. Roosevelt, concerned thatlabor unrest could derail the fragile recovery, decidedthat the federal government would sponsor collectivebargaining as part of a strategy to get the economymoving again. When this approach was ruled uncon-stitutional, the U.S. Congress passed the NationalLabor Relations Act in 1935, which, for the first time,

gave workers the right to bargain collectively. Shortlyafterward, the Council of Industrial Organization(CIO) was formed to organize less skilled workers onan industrywide basis. Now when the union called awork stoppage, such as that which took place duringthe Flint sit-down strikes of 1936–1937, the govern-ment no longer interfered, and the unions began tomake serious headway toward their goals of improvedwages and working conditions for unskilled workers.The modern union movement was born. Over thecourse of the next several decades, union bargainingsucceeded in transferring approximately 16% of share-holder wealth into the pockets of working people.

As the organized labor movement grew in strength,collective bargaining and the “union contract” cameto be the answer to labor-management relations ona daily basis, rather than the smooth equilibriumsought by the Human Relations clinicians. As a result,this movement and its practitioners gradually fadedinto obsolescence. The industrial anthropologiststhemselves appear not to have realized what was hap-pening until it was too late. Historians of social sciencehave criticized this generation of industrial anthropol-ogists for being too management centric and not con-nected sufficiently to the working class to foresee therising tide of unionization and its theoretical conse-quences. In the meantime, other disciplines such asindustrial sociology were developing new theory toexplain organizational behavior. The most prominentof these (and still dominant) is contingency theory,which explains what is happening in an organizationthrough correlations among formal variables such asorganizational structure, technology, and the environ-ment. Studies conducted under this theoretical regimerely upon quantitative data drawn from large surveysof scores or hundreds of organizations and rigorousstatistical modeling of survey results. Anthropologicalmethods were sidelined as appropriate mainly for “casestudies,” which were suspect as unreliable and non-generalizable to a large population of organizations.

Political and Ethical Issues

The era of academic expansion in the 1960s andearly 1970s brought with it serious concerns on cam-puses regarding the ethical propriety of conductingresearch under the auspices of powerful sponsorssuch as governments or corporations. Just as anthro-pologists in Great Britain reacted negatively whentheir ties to colonial administrations became a subject

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


of public criticism, so American anthropologistsreacted with distaste when they found out that certainagencies of the U.S. government had attempted toengage anthropologists in research that would becomepart of counterinsurgency programs in the develop-ing world (for example, Project Camelot). Such reve-lations, together with a growing antiwar movement inthe United States, turned anthropologists away fromgovernment service and fostered a suspicion of anypowerful sponsor who could use anthropologicalresearch in ways that might injure those studied, andalso injure anthropology in the process. In addition togovernment, multinational corporations also wereidentified as potentially dangerous sponsors. Duringthe 1960s, American multinational corporations weredominant overseas, making inroads into foreign mar-kets and setting up factories in developing countriesto reduce the cost of production. Academic anthro-pologists who were conducting fieldwork in the veryplaces that American business was investing oftensaw the negative consequences of industrialization,including increasing poverty, new disease threats, andthe disintegration of traditional social supports.

One notorious example of such tragedies was themalnutrition and infant death that followed Nestle’sintroduction of infant formula in the developingworld. Often, Third World women could not affordto continue to buy formula in the amounts recom-mended, nor could they ensure that bottles weresterile or that water to mix the formula was pure.Formula often was heavily diluted with contaminatedwater, leading to infant diarrhea, malnutrition, andoutright starvation. Women who relied on formulainstead of breastfeeding could not switch back to thebreast, since their milk supply dried up when notused. Nestle was aware of these problems, yet wouldnot withdraw the formula from countries where theseproblems were manifest, triggering a massive globalboycott of Nestle products. Such instances of unethi-cal corporate behavior further alienated anthropolo-gists from industry and caused some to begin labelingany work for industry as “unethical.” This label stuckas the American Anthropological Association (AAA)promulgated principles of professional responsibilityin 1971 that prohibited any research that could not befreely disseminated to the public. Since industrialresearch sometimes is proprietary (owned by the com-pany and not publishable without their permission),this code of ethics virtually banned industrial anthro-pology for the next two decades.

The Fragmentation of IndustrialAnthropology in Academe: 1960–1980

After the demise of the Human Relations School,industrial anthropology splintered into severalbranches, the principal ones being (1) Marxist and neo-Marxist critiques of industry at home and abroad,(2) the ethnography of industrial occupations andprofessions, and (3) the study of industrializationprocesses outside the West. Academic anthropologistswho did not practice inside corporations, but studiedthem from the outside, at a distance, were responsiblefor much of the research and conceptual develop-ment during this period.

Marxist Critique of Industry

For some anthropologists, a focus on the negativeconsequences of industrialization at home and abroadled to a radical critique of the existing industrial orderand to a cultural analysis framed in terms of Marxist,neo-Marxist, and post-Marxist theory. Marxist criti-cism focuses on the mode and relations of productionwithin capitalist economic systems—meaning theway in which economic value and surplus value areproduced—and social relations between manage-ment and workers.

Marxism holds that capitalist economies are predi-cated on an immoral and unsustainable exploitationof working people due to the notion of profit, whichMarxists view as surplus value, that is, value notrequired to cover costs, produced by workers but notfully returned to them through wages. Rather, manage-ment diverts a portion of the value to enrich itself andto enhance the enterprise. Marx believed that eventu-ally capitalism would collapse because workers wouldnot have sufficient income to absorb all of the goodsthat they were producing. Rather than waiting for thedemise of capitalism, however, Marx advocated thatworkers rise up against the owners of private enterpriseand create a new social order in which the proletariat,through a socialist state, would become the owners ofthe means of production and all of the economic valueproduced by it. Neo-Marxism and post-Marxismrevise classical Marxist theory by addressing criticismsof classical Marxism. Capitalism has not collapsed, andneo-Marxism explains why this is so and what it meansto those who reject capitalist economics.

The Marxist tradition was well suited to the condi-tions of modern industry after World War II. Ascollective bargaining gained strength in U.S. industry,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


workers and management clearly came to see themselvesas separate parties on opposite sides of a strugglefor economic gain, much as they were portrayed inMarxist writings. In this environment, anthropolo-gists focused on the ways in which management usedits power to increase the productivity of the work-force, and how the workers responded. An especiallyprominent stream of research in this vein centeredupon managerial strategies to reduce workers’ skillsand their jobs (and thus their wages, numbers, andpower) through the process of technological innova-tions. The union movement had been successful inits efforts to improve wages and working conditions,but in the process unions had ceded control oftechnological change to management. Before WorldWar II, workers had significant control over the workprocess, and in some industries they could virtuallyspeed up or slow down the work process at will.Intent on gaining something in exchange for higherwages, American management generally insisted onthe use of technology as a “managerial prerogative,”meaning that management had the right to implementnew technology whenever and however they saw fit.Managers used improvements in production technol-ogy and automation to wrest control over the workprocess away from the workers. Technology was usedboth to reduce the number of workers needed for acertain level of production and the level of skill work-ers needed to do their jobs. Machines increasinglydid the work that previously had been the provinceof skilled craftspeople. The process by which workerslost skill over time became known as deskilling, andit was associated with the rise of tedious, repetitiveindustrial jobs that were demeaning, boring, andalienating. Once management had control of thework process, they could speed up the rate of produc-tion in order to increase output without increasingcosts, thereby improving profitability. Workers oftenhad little choice but to go along with this programif they wanted to keep their jobs. Many workers losttheir jobs anyway as technological advance reducedthe need for workers in many industries.

Industrial anthropologists in the Marxist and neo-Marxist traditions carefully documented the strategiesworkers used to cope with such adverse employmentconditions. Anthropologists and qualitative sociolo-gies were among the first to empirically demonstratethe informal working knowledge that people use onthe job, both to get the work done and to protect theirjobs, skills, and earnings. While management often

assumed that less skilled workers did not have muchneed for intellect on the job in an age of automation,anthropologists found just the opposite—workersbrought their intelligence with them and used it tosolve work-related problems that management couldnot or would not address. Anthropologists conductedthis research both in the United States and abroad,delving into numerous industries, including mining,automobile manufacturing, and garment production.

An example of an ethnographic study of industrialwork that is Marxist in orientation is provided byLouise Lamphere’s study of a New England apparelfactory. She begins with a historical description of thedevelopment of the apparel industry in the UnitedStates, explaining why this particular industry hasremained labor intensive, and exploring strategiesmanagers use to maximize profit under conditions ofintensive competition. The key managerial approachto ensuring a reasonable profit is maintenance of lowwages. The hiring of marginalized workers (womenand immigrants) and locating plants in low-wageareas are managerial tactics used to ensure low wages.Lamphere also documents the coping strategies ofworkers and their union as they struggle against arelentless drive by management to continuouslyreduce labor costs by “scientific” means, a process thatalso threatens jobs, wages, and skills.

Marxist and neo-Marxist anthropologists oftenhighlight the special adversity faced by women workersin industry. Gender-related traits are used as reasonsto bar women from the most lucrative jobs in indus-try while restricting them to low status or dead-endjobs that pay poorly. Women also serve as a “reservearmy” of the unemployed (a Marxist concept), readyto go to work when needed (for example, duringWorld War II), but then finding themselves removedfrom their jobs when male workers become availableagain. At the same time, women workers continueto be responsible for domestic production (house-keeping and child rearing), leading some writers tosuggest they are “doubly exploited,” as discussed byCarol Holzberg and Maureen Giovannini. Unionorganizations that take advantage of women’s plightwhen attempting to organize groups of workerssimultaneously deny women leadership roles withinthe organized labor movement, meaning that patriar-chal practices are not restricted to the capitalists.Anthropologists have documented some cases inwhich women have overcome these barriers to partic-ipate in and even lead union movements.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Generally, anthropologists do not confine theiranalyses to what is going on at the shop floor level,but like W. Lloyd Warner, they trace lines of influencefrom the corporation to the nation-state and even theglobal economy. The Marxist anthropologist JuneNash, for example, studied a multinational petro-chemical company, including in her investigation thework of global middle managers with whom she con-ducted interviews. Nash’s work is unusual in thatmost anthropologists working in the Marxist tradi-tion do not study managers, only workers (a bias thathas limited the impact of their analyses). Nash wassurprised to find that the managers were just as alien-ated from their work as others who had no manager-ial authority. Her investigation is classic in showinghow this company is connected to larger economic,political, and social forces. More recently, Nash (hasexamined the transformation of a mass productioncompany into a technology-intensive defense pro-ducer (General Electric), focusing on the effect ofthese changes on communities and families in thelocal area (Pittsfield, Massachusetts). This work isimportant in showing that workers are not passiveobservers of such changes, but active participants inthe change process.

Occupations and Professions

While many Marxist and neo-Marxist anthropolo-gists followed the activities of industrial workers whowere largely deskilled, other anthropologists in thedecades between 1960 and 1980 focused their atten-tion on members of industrial occupations or profes-sions whose remaining or continuing skills affordedthem a place of status and distinction within the workcontext. Members of occupations or professions oftenhave characteristics that parallel those found in small-scale societies, such as a unique system of meanings,practices, and a language that distinguishes themfrom other work groups. It was Durkheim who notedthat “occupational activity [is] the richest sort ofmaterial for a common life.” Workers who cooperatetogether in the same activities and share similar expe-riences also tend to associate with one another and toform a collective identity.

The common life of occupational members givesrise to a work culture, which Herbert Applebaumdefined as a system of knowledge, techniques, atti-tudes, and behaviors appropriate to the performanceof work and social interactions in a particular worksetting. The features of a given type of work promote

certain patterns of behavior while suppressing others;these patterns are reinforced through selective hiring,formal training, and the informal enculturation ofnew recruits. Work cultures are not only influentialon the job, but off the job as well, with traditions,beliefs, and behavioral standards extending them-selves into the worker’s general life and life style.Work cultures may be compared along several dimen-sions, including social relations among workers, timeorientation (the extent to which time provides disci-pline in the work process), authority structures, rela-tions with peers (for example, friendship), language(jargon that fosters a sense of identity), dress anddemeanor, gendering (the sex typing of occupations),and roles and statuses.

A work culture lends itself well to application ofthe classical concept of culture that was prevalent dur-ing this period and the ethnographic method, andanthropologists have used ethnography to record thedistinctive cultures of many different occupations andprofessions. For example, Herbert Applebaum studiedconstruction workers, yielding insights on the rela-tionship between the technological requirementsof an industry and the nature of its work culture.Applebaum was himself a construction worker, and sohe had firsthand knowledge of the craft through manyyears of participant observation. His ethnographicaccount of life as a construction worker depicts aworld in which highly skilled craftspeople (carpenters,masons, electricians, cement finishers, ironworkers,sheet metal workers, plumbers, and others) often owntheir own tools, accessories, and trucks and in manycases have been in business for themselves at onetime or another. They know their business better thananyone else, and they thus control the work process,with an emphasis on quality. If a general managerplaces too much emphasis on speed, the worker islikely to walk off the job. Workers gain the respect ofothers through the quality of their finished work, andhighly respected journeypersons consider themselvesto be the peers of the engineers and other overseers.It is the craftspeople and their supervisors who makemost of the decisions at a work site, and since thelatter have come from the ranks, they are usually onfriendly terms with the workers. Hiring and firinghappen on the job site, not in the home office. Thepersonal networks of the supervisors and foremenand forewomen are the sources from which workersare selected, based on past experience. Workers alsodetermine whether or not conditions are safe enough

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


to commence or continue working. These conditionscreate a work culture that is highly satisfying to itsmembers, who take pride in work that they control.

Applebaum observed that the construction industryhas not been affected by the increasing mechanizationof work processes and specialization of tasks that hasled to deskilling in many other industries. Rather, con-struction workers have maintained a high level of skillin which workers control much of the work processand trade unions have great strengths. These features,in turn, are related to the technological requirementsof the industry, including the uniqueness of eachbuilding and site, the temporary duration of a givenproject, the variation in work processes due to changesin weather, and the inability to stockpile a product. Allof these requirements have prevented the advance ofmechanization and have enabled construction workersto maintain their independence and autonomy.

Over the years, anthropologists, sociologists, folk-lorists, and others working in the qualitative researchtradition have contributed much to our knowledge ofoccupational and professional work cultures. Just asthose in occupations, members of professions such asattorneys and accountants tend to form cultural pat-terns, but professions have relatively greater workautonomy and control compared with occupations.Descriptive studies of occupational and professionalcultures in many different industries—accountants,high steel workers, locomotive engineers, longshore-men, medical school students, nightclub strippers,police, professional dance musicians, rodeo workers,social workers, timber loggers, underground miners,waiters, and others—created a foundation of knowl-edge that contributed to our understanding of cul-tural phenomena in organizations and set the stagefor the concept of organizational or corporate cultureduring the 1980s.

Industrialization Processes Outside the West

During the 1960s and 1970s, the rise of fieldworkoutside the United States was supported by federalagencies such as the National Science Foundation.Such support enabled anthropologists (and membersof other disciplines, such as sociologists) to explorethe changes taking place in nations that were justbeginning to develop an industrial infrastructure. Aprominent theory in the social sciences at the time,known as convergence theory, predicted that societiesaround the world would become ever more similarto one another in their ways of life, based on the

technological imperative of industrialization. Theconvergence hypothesis holds that as nationaleconomies shift from traditional agriculture tomodern industry (that is, large-scale mass produc-tion) as the primary mode of production, the tech-nologies of industrialization would require parallelchanges in society and life style across many differentnations, including the breakdown of the extendedfamily, migration from rural to urban areas, the con-gregation of populations in urban centers, the needfor increasing discipline of the workforce, mandatedformal education for children, and similar occupa-tional structures. Many of these societal changes, itwas argued, follow from the fact that industry orga-nizes production on a mass scale at certain concen-trated locations (for example, factories, mines, mills),and this tends to attract people who seek a livelihood,as well as smaller supplier firms, which provide prod-ucts and services both to the primary industry and itsworkforce. The industrial requirements for literacyand regimented individual and group behavior werethe reasons why societies increasingly required formaleducation for children, with schools also serving as ameans to teach discipline to the future workforce.

Some theorists believed that every industrializingsociety, regardless of its history and culture, must fol-low the same evolutionary pathway as that taken byWestern societies with respect to the development ofits economic and sociocultural systems. (The onegreat exception to this was the Soviet Union, but itended up supporting the convergence hypothesiswhen socialism collapsed at the end of the 1980s andearly 1990s.) An ethnocentric implication of thisassumption is that non-Western nations will be ableto industrialize only to the extent that they emulateWestern societies in their institutional structures, val-ues, and behavioral patterns. From this point of view,traditional indigenous customs (kinship obligations,spiritual orientation) are thought to impede the tran-sition to industrialization.

Anthropological studies of societies in the midst ofindustrial transitions provided a critique of conver-gence theory, based on historical specificity andcultural relativism. A thorough discussion of thisliterature is provided in Carol Holzberg and MaureenGiovannini’s 1981 review, mentioned earlier. Anthro-pologists provided a more complex and nuanced viewof preindustrial societies, demonstrating that variousaspects of their traditional social structures and life-ways may complement industry. For example, Clifford

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Geertz demonstrated that indigenous entrepreneurscan play a crucial role in economic development;Max Gluckman showed that dual economies, inwhich indigenous people straddle two economicworlds (the village and the urban center), can coexisteffectively with industry and are necessary to thefulfillment of human needs; and June Nash’s workexplored the role of traditional cultural forms suchas rituals in easing the transition to industrial life.Other contributions of anthropologists expanded ourknowledge of industrialization processes in severalrelated areas, including qualitative changes that takeplace in preexisting institutions, the emergence of newinstitutional forms, the role of ethnicity and race asfactors in structuring social relations within andbeyond the industrial workplace, the role of women inindustrialization processes, and the relative costs andbenefits of the shift to industrial production. Theknowledge base accumulated through anthropologicalstudies in the developing world also supported radicalcritiques of mainstream models of economic develop-ment models, including dependency theory, whichholds that both industrial development (as seen in theWest) and underdevelopment (witnessed in the so-called Third World) are interdependent parts of a sin-gle global system of modern capitalist production.

Through fieldwork outside the United States,anthropologists made significant contributions to dif-fusion theory, a multidisciplinary approach to under-standing the adoption of innovations (that is, productsor technologies new within their context) within pop-ulations, nations, and cultures. Anthropologists con-tributed to the expansion and increasing sophisticationof diffusion theory, which is one of the principal theo-retical frameworks underpinning the modern market-ing discipline. Some of the most significant discoveriesmade by anthropologists have focused on the after-math of new product diffusion into geographic regionswhere specific technology-based commodities previ-ously were unknown. Often, unintended (and nega-tive) consequences have been the result. For example,Pertti Pelto studied the introduction of snowmobilesto reindeer herders in Lapland. Families of herders thatwere able to afford to purchase and maintain a snow-mobile also were able to increase their herds of rein-deer as a result, since more reindeer could be herdedwith a snowmobile versus skis, which had been usedtraditionally. At the same time, however, the snowmo-bile itself frightened the reindeer, and this new stressortended to deplete the herds overall. Consequently, a de

facto class system of haves and have-nots emerged in asociety that traditionally had been more egalitarian.Such studies were the forerunners of the modernemphasis on consumers and consumption processes.

In addition to the aforementioned literature, thereare three other anthropologists whose work deservesspecial mention. Each studied business organizationsin quite distinctive ways that do not fit into any of thecategories described above and/or later applied theo-retical constructs to business problems, and each wasprecocious or prescient in his vision of future develop-ments in global economic and social systems. Thework of these three scholars is relevant to the relation-ship of business and anthropology in the current era.

Thomas Rohlen wrote a classic ethnography focus-ing on a medium-size Japanese bank, explaining thecultural logic of Japanese organizational structuresand practices just as these were becoming acutelyinteresting to business scholars and practitioners inthe West. Rohlen’s approach of entering the bank as atrainee, and participating in the full training programwith a cohort of new recruits, provides numerousinsights into Japanese management methods thatwould not be available otherwise. For example, hedescribes a training exercise called Roto, in whichrecruits are required to leave the training academyand not return until they have persuaded a stranger toallow them to perform some household chore free ofcharge, a very difficult task in a nation where favorsfrom strangers create onerous obligations. Recruitswho finally found someone willing to allow them todischarge this task were so grateful that they did anyjob gladly, no matter how dreadful (for example,cleaning an outhouse). Managers used this exercise toinstill in trainees the notion that the nature of a taskshould not determine one’s attitude toward it; rather,one’s attitude should determine how a task is per-ceived. Such normative approaches to employee con-trol are becoming more common in Western firmsthat have adopted the practice of consciously fashion-ing “corporate culture” as a means to instill values andnorms that generate their own self-policing discipline.

Edward Hall, who is said to be the most frequentlycited anthropologist among business authors, devel-oped a novel theory of culture as a network of biolog-ically based “primary message systems” that humansextend and enhance through social communication.Hall’s interests ranged far beyond language and intothe nonverbal and contextual aspects of communica-tion. Much of his work was aimed at explicating the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


role of space and time as contextual dimensions ofcommunication; through this work he invented anumber of constructs that have become standardsin the world of international business, includingthe concepts of monochronic and polychronic time(time experienced as linear and segmented versustime experienced as cyclical and nonsegmented), andhigh-context and low-context cultures (cultures inwhich most of the informational content of a messageis embedded in contextual variables versus culturesin which most of the information is explicit andencoded in language). These constructs were pre-sented in Beyond Culture and The Dance of Life. Halland his partner Mildred Reed Hall wrote a series ofbooks applying Hall’s theoretical work on intercul-tural communication to the field of internationalbusiness, especially directed toward businesspeople inthe United States, France, Germany, and Japan. TheHalls’ interests are in helping businesspeople to trans-late and interpret communication processes andevents across cultural boundaries and to preventcross-cultural misunderstandings. Hall’s books havebeen translated into 16 languages, his work often iscited in business textbooks, and his ideas have beenincorporated into the international business lexicon.

In the late 1970s, Alvin Wolfe developed the idea ofa new level of sociocultural integration above thelevel of the nation-state. In his 1960s study of theAfrican mineral extraction industry, Wolfe discovereda complex, global-level network of wealthy individuals,families, corporations, and states operating together toensure that raw materials for the world’s industrialplants are indeed produced. Nationality was not anissue; the supranational network operated regardlessor in spite of the interests of individual nation-statesor other actors. Indeed, the “supranational integra-tion of the economic sphere,” as Wolfe put it, tendedto supersede political, international ties and cleav-ages. Wolfe postulated that the nation-state was notthe highest or most complex level of socioculturalintegration, as had been proposed by previous theorists(for example, Marshall Sahlins and Elman Service).Rather, supranational networks seemed capable oftranscending individual nation-states in political andeconomic maneuvering. These observations stillappear fresh and relevant to theorizing on globaliza-tion processes.

The themes developed by these anthropologists,particularly ethnographic exploration of corporateentities outside the United States, and communication

within cross-cultural contexts, have continued toresonate in the millennial era that is described next.The next era is distinguished, however, by the reemer-gence of anthropological practice in the businessworld, that is, the application of anthropologicalknowledge to business-related problems by practi-tioners, rather than strictly academic interest inindustry, which was the case from 1960 to 1980 (witha few exceptions, such as Edward Hall). The reasonsfor this important change, and its implications, areexamined below.

Part II: The Contemporary Landscape

Globalization: 1980 to Present

The last two decades of the 20th century witnesseda transformation of capitalist economies, marked byincreasing global flows of goods and services, world-wide deregulation, and the diffusion of converginginformation and telecommunications technologies;together, this is sometimes known as globalization.These factors have acted in concert with other impor-tant socioeconomic trends, including rising per capitaincomes in industrialized and newly industrializingcountries and shifts in the demographic compositionof industrialized nations, to alter the competitivelandscape for American corporations. New marketswere opening around the world, and new competitorswere rising in nearly every industry. American firmsfound that they could not maintain the economichegemony they had enjoyed during the brief periodfollowing World War II and up to the 1960s and 1970s.

The term Fordism refers to structures and ideolo-gies generated by mass production as an economicsystem, whereby the producer (à la Henry Ford) deter-mined nearly everything about the products that weremade and consumers had no choice but to buy whatwas put in front of them. In what became known asthe “post-Fordist” world of the late 20th century, theproducer was no longer king. Instead, consumers wererecognized as the crucial actors under the rules of the“new economy,” in which services often generatedmore revenue and employment than goods, and theknowledge content of a corporate asset often wasmore valuable than its tangible matter.

New and emerging markets in Asia, EasternEurope, and certain parts of the developing worldbecame lucrative targets for corporations, as con-sumers in these regions gained sufficient incomes tosupport purchases of services and goods offered by

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


multinational and transnational firms. Saturatedconsumer markets in the West fragmented into spe-cialized niches, requiring companies to learn muchmore about the preferences of demographic groupsthat they previously had lumped together or simplytaken for granted. Gradually, it dawned on Americanfirms that they no longer understood (if, indeed, theyever did) their customers, whether these were in theirown country or abroad. To understand and reachthese consumers both at home and abroad, the firmsthemselves had to change their policies and practices,sometimes in fundamental ways. Yet the metamor-phosis required to turn Western corporations awayfrom the 20th century’s producer domination, withits self-focused and functionalist perspective, andmove them toward a more globally competitive, con-sumer-centric view of the world is no small matter.Who better to join this sort of millennial quest forrenewal than an other-focused discipline such asanthropology?

Economic and technological turbulence in busi-ness environments opened new opportunities forrelationships between anthropology and business inthe post-Fordist era. The anthropological incentive torespond has been influenced by three developments.

First, there has been a significant gap betweenthe production of new PhDs in anthropology andthe rate of vacancies in academic employment open-ings since the late 1970s. In 1984, for the first timesince the survey of new PhDs was conducted bythe American Anthropological Association (AAA),nonacademic employment for new PhDs exceededacademic employment. At first, only a small trickleof these graduates moved into the private sector, anestimated 100 full-time business practitioners around1990, but as word of their achievements grew, thetrickle became a steady stream. Until the AAA con-ducts another survey, we must guess at the percentageof new PhDs entering business employment today.

Second, academic institutions have faced mountingpressure to seek external funding for research fromfederal agencies (to offset both direct and indirectcosts), and these agencies (for example, the NationalScience Foundation) have been directing a greatershare of grant monies toward strategic, interdiscipli-nary issues and problems (those that are of greatestconcern to society versus individual disciplines). Suchproblems may involve private sector actors such ascorporations (for example, knowledge and distributedintelligence, micromarkets in developing nations,

disaster prevention and recovery). Working withcorporations in such contexts no longer seems beyondthe pale of appropriate anthropological involvement.Third, in response to its growing practitioner ranks,the AAA revised its principles of professional respon-sibility during this era, removing language that essen-tially forbade research that could not be publiclydisseminated. The AAA also founded the NationalAssociation for the Practice of Anthropology (NAPA)in 1984, and several of this organization’s officershave been full-time business practitioners or acade-mic consultants. NAPA’s first monograph encouragedrelationships between business and anthropology(Marietta Baba, Business and Industrial Anthropology:An Overview). The stage was set for American anthro-pology’s second major foray into the world of busi-ness practice.

Three interdisciplinary domains in which anthro-pologists have explored new opportunities throughbusiness-related research and practice include orga-nizational behavior and management; ethnographi-cally informed design of products, services, andsystems; and consumer behavior and marketing.Each domain reflects an interdisciplinary field. Manyof the anthropologists join established groups of col-leagues from other disciplines, but some authors are“hybrids,” remaining in anthropology and also join-ing other fields.

Each of the three domains is fairly well established,with some representation in academic departmentsof various kinds—including anthropology, business,and interdisciplinary research centers and insti-tutes—a tradition in the scholarly literature, and anactive community of practice, including positions inmajor corporate research laboratories and institutes(such as GM, IBM, Intel, Microsoft, Motorola,Xerox), business functions (for example, marketing)and consulting firms (at one point, Sapient employedmore than 20 PhD anthropologists). Scholar-practi-tioners are not unusual, because corporations oftengrant access to scholars in exchange for some servicesuch as strategic research. Each of the three domainsoperates at both national/regional and at interna-tional/global levels. Some scholars and practitionersspecialize in the former, some in the latter, whileothers are competent at both levels.

Organizational Behavior and Management

Continuing the tradition established by W. LloydWarner and his colleagues in the 1930s, this line of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


inquiry grows directly out of the producer orientationwith its focus on the interior of the firm—describingand explaining the behaviors of people and groupsinside the corporation and possibly trying to effectmodifications in these behaviors. Anthropologicalinterest in organizations continues to be inspired bya conception of formal organization as “society writsmall,” thus constituting a site for the productionand reproduction of distinctive localized systems ofmeaning and practice (culture). Warner’s encompass-ing vision of inquiry at multiple levels of analysis (forexample, industry, enterprise, work group), as well asinteractions among these levels, also is sustained. Thesubstantive focus of the research has changed consider-ably, however. While Warner and company were inter-ested in treating the problem of labor-managementstrife with functionalist theory, the post-Fordistanthropologists have other agendas.

Anthropologists studying businesses today are partof a larger universe that examines organizationalphenomenon in general. Yet apart from the masterconcept of culture (and that, of course, is in disarray),the private sector literature does not reflect a coherenttheoretical agenda or even a discourse organizedaround competing schools of thought. Rather, theliterature may be clustered into three general areasthat reflect enduring anthropological interests, aswell as historical developments in the larger frameof post-Fordist capitalism: organizational cultures intechnology-based firms, boundary-crossing in aglobal context, and regional perspectives on workand corporations. These three areas are interrelated,and distinctions between particular works assignedto each may be somewhat arbitrary.

In the review below, further developments in theanthropology of work and occupations, neo- andpost-Marxism, and/or industrialization outside theUnited States that do not involve empirical researchor practice inside a business organization (that is,with access to the business) are not considered (forexample, research on academic-based scientists, engi-neers, or physicians; research on unions), unless suchwork has fairly clear implications for corporations orindustry as a whole.

Organizational Cultures inTechnology-Based Firms

In the 1980s, the business community was intro-duced to the concept of “corporate culture” via theconsulting industry, yet there was considerable

oversimplification of the construct as it diffused viathis mechanism. Academic anthropologists wereunder pressure to bring more enlightened views tothe management literature, but many were skepticalof the corporate agenda of “culture change.” Withinthis context, a small number of anthropologists wereable to gain access to corporations for basic researchpurposes via networks based at corporate researchlaboratories and research universities. The first waveof anthropologists to examine organizational behav-ior at this time were intent on demonstrating the sub-tlety and complexity of anthropological conceptionsof cultural phenomenon in organizations and onintroducing the “native’s point of view” as a valid andpowerful source of empirical data. This latter goalwas meant to distinguish anthropological work fromthat of other academic disciplines that also claimedauthority in the area of corporate culture (for example,psychology), yet sometimes represented culture asa monolithic phenomenon. The anthropologists alsowere influenced by previous literature on occupationaland professional cultures. Their earliest efforts concep-tualized corporations as complex configurations ofinteracting technical and managerial subcultures.

For example, Kathleen Gregory, in an oft-cited paperin the Administrative Science Quarterly, employedethnoscience ethnography to uncover “native viewparadigms,” or ways that technical professionals insideSilicon Valley computer technology firms understandtheir social worlds. Gregory explained the use ofethnoscience methods to elicit native taxonomies orclassification schemes that in turn signaled the exis-tence of occupational boundaries within the firms.These taxonomies could be used to gain a deeperunderstanding of occupational identities and experi-ences that were most important to individuals affili-ated with particular identities. Gregory was one of thefirst to identify “the project” as a critical activity formany computer professionals; this later proved to bea key insight for decoding the cultural logic and socialpractices of hackers (see below).

Later in the 1980s, Frank Dubinskas (who at onepoint in his career wrote cases for the HarvardBusiness School) studied a biotechnology start-upfirm and deconstructed the conflict between execu-tives and PhD molecular biologists, showing how dif-ferences in the temporal patterning of their activitiescreated serious conflicts around the goals of research,how to make choices among projects, whetherresearch direction should change, and which projects

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


should be dropped. Dubinskas found that managersand biologists possess fundamentally different imagesof the self that are related to their notions of develop-mental time, giving rise to stereotypical images ofthe other (for example, mature versus immature)and explaining why the two subcultures frequentlyconflicted in ways that thwarted the company’sperformance.

It was also during the late 1980s that ElizabethBriody and Marietta Baba investigated GeneralMotors’s difficulty repatriating managers from over-seas duty. Drawing on cultural materialism, theydescribed two antithetical subcultures within thecorporation, one pro-international and one anti-international, each dominating different organiza-tional units within GM, based upon historical andeconomic factors. Depending on a repatriating man-ager’s destination upon return, his (all were male)knowledge pertaining to overseas environmentswould be valued more or less highly by one of thesesubcultures, respectively, leading to significant differ-ences in postrepatriation job assignments and jobsatisfaction. This discovery was enabled by statisti-cally testing the validity of several different “nativehypotheses” against a database of information aboutexpatriate assignments and repatriation outcomesand modifying these hypotheses systematically untilone hybrid model was found that explained most ofthe variance in the data set.

Around this same time, Julian Orr made signifi-cant contributions to our understanding of culturallyconstituted meanings and socially organized workpractices among groups of technical workers whoare not considered “professional” or “managerial.”Orr was based at Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center(PARC), and while there he became known for hisresearch on Xerox repair technicians. Once a servicetechnician himself, Orr was interested in why servicetechnicians were able to repair technologicallyadvanced copiers in about 95% of all cases, usuallywithout much or any resort to the company’s experthelp system, even though they had little if any knowl-edge of the physics or engineering underlying themachines. After following pairs of technicians forabout 3 weeks, Orr discovered that they solved diffi-cult machine repair problems by telling each otherstories of past machine failures and finding in theirstories diagnostic and procedural clues about howto proceed with the present case. Significantly, thesestories were not only ones that the technicians

themselves had experienced but ones they hadlearned from their colleagues through war story swapmeets that took place whenever technicians gatheredinformally (for example, at training sessions). Thecompany had no idea that this knowledge resourceeven existed. Xerox modified its practices based onOrr’s findings by equipping all technicians withmobile radio phones so that they could communicatewith one other and with roving “tiger teams” morereadily. Orr’s work also was innovative in conceptual-izing the technicians’ work practices as a triangularrelationship between the technician, the customer,and the machine, such that the customers became asource of knowledge about machine misbehavior andtechnicians became a source of knowledge about cus-tomers. Technicians, Orr discovered, often needed torepair a customer relationship, as well as a machine.This research demonstrated the economic value oftacit knowledge possessed by employees who previ-ously had not been considered “knowledge workers.”

The entire corpus of research at Xerox PARC (to bediscussed in greater depth later) was highly influentialin placing anthropology at the center of a movementwithin American corporations known as “knowledgemanagement.” As demonstrated in Orr’s studies,many different types of work groups develop tacitand/or embodied systems of local knowledge that areembedded within their work practices and representintangible assets that may hold great value for thecorporation. Knowledge management is a set ofprinciples, practices, methods, and tools that enablesfirms to identify such assets and convert them tomore explicit form so that they can be further devel-oped and leveraged for the firm’s benefit (forexample, mobile radio phones). At Xerox PARC, andlater at a spin-off organization called the Institute forResearch on Learning (IRL), many of the core con-structs associated with the knowledge managementmovement first were conceptualized. An especiallyimportant contribution emerged from the ethno-graphic research of anthropologist Jean Lave, whowas involved in the early development of IRL, aninstitution founded in the late 1980s with a seed grantfrom the Xerox Foundation and dedicated to under-standing the social context of learning. Lave’s researchon Liberian tailors revealed that learning is situated ina community of practice—an occupational network(such as Orr’s repair technicians) that shares a set ofwork activities and a common identity. Lave found thatlearning takes place within a community of practice

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


through “legitimate peripheral participation,” aprocess by which apprentices come to master increas-ingly more difficult and complex tasks as they gradu-ally adopt the identity of the group. Lave collaboratedwith Etienne Wenger to adapt this concept for learn-ing in various corporate work settings and to write apopular book on the subject. These developmentscoincided roughly with an explosion of interest in theemerging “knowledge economy” and (a bit later) withthe Japanese management scholar Ikujiro Nonaka’sresearch identifying tacit-explicit knowledge conver-sion as a new source of innovation for corporations.Communities of practice (or “CoPs,” as they becameknown) were highlighted as one of the key loci thatembed tacit knowledge, and this concept entered thebusiness lexicon as the knowledge managementmovement diffused around the globe.

While the studies described maintain continuitywith the previous era in their focus on occupational“subcultures” or communities, the very notion of“culture” and even “subculture” had become increas-ingly problematic by the 1990s. Anthropologistsseemed more interested in the blurring and crossingof boundaries than in descriptions of what they mightdemarcate. Interestingly, American corporations alsowere working hard on the project of taking downfunctional boundaries that had been built up over acentury of Fordist practice; walls dividing functional“silos” inside corporations were found to increaseproduct development time (and thus product cost)and also were responsible for defects in product qual-ity (for example, engineers didn’t cooperate withmanufacturing). The great transformation from thevertical to the horizontal corporation was under way,with a huge investment in information technology toforce information and work to flow more efficientlyacross basic processes (for example, product develop-ment) instead of inefficiently up and down chains ofcommand, as it had in the Fordist period.

Thus, rather than focusing on occupational sub-cultures within specific firms per se, anthropologicalresearch inside corporations after the early 1990stended to reflect efforts by corporations, communi-ties, or individuals to cross boundaries of variouskinds, whether functional, national, or otherwise (asdescribed here and in the next section). As it turnedout, however, during the 1990s, the Fordist structuresproved difficult to dislodge. For example, in the mid1990s, Marietta Baba investigated a major corpora-tion’s effort to streamline its product development

process by introducing a single “strategic” technologysystem that would replace hundreds of different sys-tems then in operation across dozens of differenttechnical groups. She mapped the cultural ecology ofthese groups, defining the ecological niches formedby their location in a two-dimensional product devel-opment environment. Baba was able to explain vari-ance (for example, resistance, adoption, reinvention)in these work groups’ responses to the corporation’sstrategy as “normal” extensions of adaptive patternsthey had developed within the niches in which theywere situated. Following this work, Baba separatelyexplained why work groups resist electronic connec-tions (for example, CAD/CAM, electronic data inter-change) with other groups when there are preexistingrelationships of distrust.

In the meantime, as the initial excitement surround-ing the concept of corporate culture abated, Americanmanagement departments gradually adjusted to itsexistence, generally in one of three ways. For some,“culture” became a variable or a set of variables incontingency models of the corporation, a system ofconstructs to be defined operationally and measuredin surveys. For others who defined culture in waysthat defied such modeling (for example, the interpre-tivist school), culture became a specialty niche orboutique practice in a handful of select businessschools. Important contributions were made by man-agement scholars working in both of these traditions;for example, Dan Denison modeled “cultural factors”that correlate with high performance in organiza-tions; Joanne Martin and colleagues parsed the man-agement literature on corporate culture into threestreams (integration, differentiation, and fragmenta-tion), corresponding roughly with developments inorganizational theory; Gideon Kunda’s ethnographyof a high technology firm revealed the human cost ofnormative control in a high commitment culture(this is only a tiny sampling of many rich offeringsthat helped to establish the legitimacy of “corporateor organizational culture” as a field of study). Morelikely, however, corporate culture was simply dis-pensed with or ignored by faculty in managementdepartments as too complex or difficult to change.Publishing cultural research conducted from a non-modeling perspective in top management journalswas problematic, unless accompanied by significantadditional quantitative analysis.

Anthropology departments for the most part werenot heavily influenced by the developments described

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


above, although faculty members in a few departmentsand some practitioners expressed interest in organi-zational research. Such interests were incorporatedonly very gradually as “‘normal science” in anthropol-ogy via several mechanisms: individual faculty interest,course development, and funded research; studentinterest and the production of masters’ theses anddissertations focused on corporations; and the place-ment of doctoral graduates in corporations wherethey maintained identities as anthropologists andbegan to produce literature on their own. The acade-mic departments that have become seats of graduate-level teaching and/or research in the anthropologyof private sector organizations included the Collegeof William and Mary, Michigan State University,Northwestern University, Oregon State University, theUniversity of North Texas, and Wayne State University(where the first undergraduate course on businessanthropology was taught in 1984–1985 by MariettaBaba). A number of other universities have permitteddoctoral students to conduct dissertation researchin corporations or to focus on business-related phe-nomenon (for example, Chicago, Temple, Yale). As aresult, the literature began to reflect more enduringand immediate anthropological interests.

Boundary Crossing in a Global Context

In the 1990s, research tended to focus more oncross-cultural phenomena in corporate settings,including studies of transplanted firms, firms basedoutside the United States, and firms whose globallydistributed employees work virtually. The Anthropo-logy of Work Review dedicated a special issue to thesesubjects. Over time, this stream of research has fol-lowed the currents of social science literature gener-ally, shifting its attention to the construction of self,identity, and community in a world where traditionalframes of reference are dissolving and new patternsemerge to startle and intrigue. In each of the worksdescribed below, anthropologists discover individualsand communities whose selves and lives are trans-formed through work in a multinational or transna-tional business, suggesting that such organizationsare becoming one of the most powerful forces givingmeaning and direction to human experience in post-modern society.

Tomoko Hamada, who is known for her writing onJapanese companies in the United States, describes acase of alleged (and ambiguous) sexual harassmentwithin a Japanese-owned plant in the United States.

In this case study, an American female factory workerfirst aligns with her Japanese bosses in preventingformation of a union at the plant, for which sheis rewarded with promotion to supervisory status.The woman is put off, however, by Japanese methodsfor training junior members of the management teamthat she finds insulting, and she also is shunned byher former American peers who believe she hasturned on them. In the end, the woman files a sexualharassment lawsuit against the Japanese plant man-ager, which is settled out of court, forcing the managerto return to Japan in humiliation. Hamada tells thestory from multiple points of view over time, showinghow different parties’ perspectives form and evolve asthey interact with one another, shifting individuals’self-representations in the process. The zone of culturalinteraction is rife with paradox and inconsistency;new boundaries are constantly formed and re-formedalong with new political alliances. Cultural identitiesare in flux and are created in situ; there are few staticvariables or invisible cultural assumptions that can becounted upon to create conflict (although Americanindividualism seems to be a powerful theme in thecase). People create multiple self-identities in theprocess of engagement with intra- and intersubjectivedialogues in this fresh postmodern tale of cross-cultural encounter and betrayal in an Americanfactory.

Douglas Caulkins sleuths the “unexpected” entre-preneurs found in the deindustrialized region ofWales and Northeast England, where governmentpolicies have encouraged the development of indige-nous, high-tech start-up firms as a means of internaljob creation. Generally speaking, high-tech entrepre-neurs are not attracted to such “rust belt” areas, butsurprisingly, a group of them have launched newfirms in the deindustrialized peripheries of theUnited Kingdom outside Southeast England. Theentrepreneurs were “unexpected” in a double sense—they neither intended to start their own firms nor didthe region initially appear to possess the cultural oreconomic infrastructure to support them. Caulkinsdiscovered that many of the entrepreneurs werehighly trained engineers who only started their ownfirms after they encountered career obstacles at largecorporations. He identified four distinct types ofcareer paths that resulted in different types of socialnetworks, each of which enabled the entrepreneurs inquestion to form a specific kind of successful start-up. Caulkins examines the cultural ecology of these

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


start-ups and their prospects for growth on the basisof the entrepreneurs’ self-defined trajectories.

Carla Freeman describes the pink-collar femaleinformatics workers of Barbados who have fashioneda quasiprofessional identity that distinguishes themfrom their blue-collar sisters toiling in nearby facto-ries. A professional dress and demeanor complementsthe “cool” look and feel of their office environmentswhile reflecting and reinforcing the disciplined habi-tus required by the informatics industry. Significantly,the production of their informatics work cannot bedisentangled from the women’s consumption prac-tices; many of the women engage in regular globalshopping trips to purchase materials that will betransformed into affordable articles of clothing to bepurchased by their coworkers. The informal economyof trade in clothes supplements the low wages earnedin the formal economy, while the low-priced fashionsallow the women to stock their closets with an array ofstylish outfits. The informal economy thus supportsthe formal one, and it appears that the latter couldnot be sustained without the former. Production andconsumption processes also mutually reinforce oneanother while being enmeshed in global flows ofgoods, services, capital, and people. Freeman’s engag-ing analysis is edged with criticism as she interrogatesthe relationship between the workers’ clothing prefer-ences and managerial intentions to discipline andcontrol their female subordinates.

At the turn of the century, anthropologists also havebeen at the forefront of inquiries on distributed work,a hallmark of the global economy. AnthropologistBonnie Nardi is known for her research on “informa-tion ecologies,” a concept that situates mediated com-munication technologies within their contexts of use.Nardi’s research has shown that human face-to-facecommunication has advantages that cannot be repli-cated or substituted by any of today’s communica-tions media (supporting touch, shared activities,attention management, and network development)but also has costs (disruption, expense, effort) thatmay not always be sustainable over the long term. Thesocial linkages that are built and sustained by face-to-face communication are a necessary prerequisite foreffective distributed work. Therefore, a firm mustunderstand the ecological context of mediated com-munication so that effective choices can be maderegarding the types of technologies selected and theappropriate sequencing of face-to-face and mediatedcommunication events.

Marietta Baba, Julia Gluesing and their colleaguesalso study distributed work and provide an ethno-graphic account of an American-based global firm’sattempt to transfer a marketing methodology to aFrench retailing company via a global virtual team.Internal conflict breaks out within the team regardingthe cultural appropriateness (phronesis) of transferringcertain aspects of the methodology, and this nearlybrings about the team’s destruction. Ironically, it wasonly when team members’ interests shifted from fac-tional conflict to more individualized self-interestthat they were able to cooperate and collaborate. Theresulting move toward virtual community was enabledby the corporation’s global incentive system and strat-egy, which threatened to undo the careers of squab-bling nationalists. This study challenged conventionalmanagement theory by demonstrating the mutablecharacter of key variables over time (for example, inter-dependence), showing that agents’ behavior causesvariables to fluctuate, meaning that a variable cannot beset at one point and assumed to remain stable, as is thecase in many theoretical models. The ethnographicaccount also revealed that the geographical distributionpatterns of people and resources on the ground are rel-evant to the processes of distributed cognition and tothe ways in which leaders exploit historical, cultural,and linguistic resources to further their own agendas.

The literature described above marches to the beatof many drummers. There are multiple audiences,with different research problems, goals, and languages,including cultural anthropology; science, technology,and society studies; the anthropology of work; organi-zational behavior; applied anthropology; and others.The result is a fragmented literature that is difficult toaccess and somewhat awkward to summarize or syn-thesize. Yet, understanding may be enhanced throughthe juxtaposition of diverse intellectual currents, andone approach that may provide a pathway towardsuch articulation is the recent (or renewed) tendencyof anthropologists to study geographic regions in theUnited States that are characterized by distinctiveindustrial, corporate, and/or work behavior and thento join forces or at least read and reflect upon eachother’s work and compare what they have discoveredand learned from each other. This stream of organiza-tional behavior literature is described next.

Regional Perspectives on Work and Corporations

Another Warner legacy was the regional contextu-alization of industrial phenomena (for example, the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Yankee City studies). Anthropologists have continuedthis tradition but have modernized it by reflectingnew themes of global integration (for example, viatechnology or immigration) that find expression inregional economic patterns. Of special interest aregeographic areas that generate distinctive economicforms, such as Silicon Valley with its high-tech start-ups. Some anthropologists have invested a decade ormore in their efforts to describe and explain suchregions and the companies they create. Significantly,when individual anthropologists or groups collaboratein studying the same region, or compare their obser-vations across regions, more significant discoveriesare possible.

A prime example of collaboration in regional stud-ies is the ongoing research focused on Silicon Valley.Anthropologists began studying Silicon Valley in theearly 1980s with Kathleen Gregory’s dissertation, titledSigning Up: The Culture and Careers of Silicon ValleyComputer People. Eleanor Wynn, the first anthropol-ogy intern to study at Xerox Palo Alto ResearchCenter, helped Gregory gain access to Silicon Valleyfirms for this landmark study. It was one of the first todepict in detail the social structures, processes, prac-tices, and systems of meaning underlying the remark-able capacity of this unique region to generate largenumbers of technology-based start-up firms, despitetheir high risk of failure. In her pioneering research,Gregory explained the importance of computer pro-fessionals’ commitment to new technology “projects”rather than firms per se; it was this connection to aproject that enabled people to move around fromfirm to firm, an essential element of the dynamism ofthe region. Gregory did not completely unpack theproject; that was not her focus. Further insights intothe substantive nature of these projects had to waituntil later, and they turned out to be crucial.

Nearly 20 years after Gregory’s study, in a specialissue of the Anthropology of Work Review, severalanthropologists took up the thesis that high-techwork, based in firms such as those found in SiliconValley, may be framed in moral terms that relate tothe social benefits technology promises to deliver toits producers and consumers. Based on long-termethnographic research in the Silicon Valley region andon studies of specific firms such as Apple, a number ofanthropologists have discovered that the language andculture of high-tech work is permeated with a senseof “doing good,” a social construction with rootsthat connect Silicon Valley to notions of technical

“progress” grounded in the Industrial Revolution.Authors contributing to the special issue illustratevarious aspects of this construction. For example,Chuck Darrah’s informants engage in emotion-ladendescriptions of Silicon Valley as a future-oriented,progressive geographical locus whose power derivesfrom the innovative potential that may be realized incultural diversity. Or, maybe not—residents are justas likely to disagree with this premise and argue witheach other over it. Darrah postulates that the zealotrybred by life in the Valley may be a reaction to theinvisibility of most people’s work (for example, makingmicroprocessors for automobiles), the fragility ofliving on an earthquake fault at the edge of the PacificOcean, and/or the banality of spending much of one’sday dealing with the logistical hassles of moving peoplearound a region that is overcrowded with other people,highways, and automobiles.

In another piece appearing in the same issue,E. Gabriella Coleman writes about the practices ofhackers (in this context, individuals who are expertsand insiders in the occupational culture of computerprogramming), affiliated with Linux—many ofwhom presumably live in Silicon Valley and whoseproducts are used by Silicon Valley companies. Linuxis a firm whose productive output depends primarilyupon the voluntary contributions of thousands ofsoftware developers working together over theInternet to generate technically excellent and eco-nomically competitive software that is used by majorglobal corporations such as IBM. Linux-based prod-ucts now are competing with Microsoft on the openmarket in a David versus Goliath-style drama that hasthousands of computer industry watchers on the edgeof their seats. Linux grew out of the open source codemovement. Open source code makes the core com-puter programming of software products freely avail-able over the Internet, as guaranteed by an ingeniouslegal instrument called the “copyleft.” No one cancopyright code that has been copylefted, so it remainsfree. Coleman compares the hackers’ practices of pro-duction and moral notions of freedom to those ofmedieval guilds; both developed methods that aretechnical and aesthetic in nature. The hackers aremotivated to high levels of performance because oftheir love of programming—for them it is a means ofartistic expression and a means of technological inno-vation. Due to the copyleft and the Internet overwhich code is shared, there has been an explosionof free software projects, each of which is like a

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


miniguild. The projects turn out to be the centralorganizing mechanism through which the miniguildsare embodied—each has its own source code, techni-cal documentation, organizational structure, techni-cal emphasis, computer language preference, andstyle of development. Newcomers to a project mustprove themselves through an apprenticeship in whichthey demonstrate their commitment and skillthrough collaborative learning. Coleman points outthat with Linux, there is no commodification of soft-ware, yet the products still circulate in the market.Further, the technology does not set the moral orsocial aspects of work; these are shaped by the com-munity of practice (that is, the hackers). She alsoargues that the hackers’ high performance proves thatintellectual property protection is not a requirementfor the creation of cutting-edge technical products.The hackers are not in a crusade against capitalism,but neither are they reifying it. Rather, their workappears to represent a “qualified means” (perhaps analternative) by which participation in the market canbest be carried out.

The Silicon Valley work suggests that some organiza-tions (for example, Linux) have found (or individualswithin them have found) a means by which to enableor enhance a sense of moral purpose or mission in theexperience of work, and that these organizations enjoyan increased level of effort, productivity, and/or inno-vation gains resulting from the motivation thatderives from such moral enhancement. The moralsources of economic performance may be realizing anadditional boost under late capitalism as a result of aprocess through which work becomes sacralized,much as some consumption experiences have experi-enced sacralization during the post-Fordist era (seediscussion in next section on consumer behavior).Sacralization does not mean that work is somehowreligious or spiritual, but rather that one’s workand/or work products come to represent somethingthat transcends ordinary experience, that they (bysome process) have become more powerful andextraordinary than that which is merely the banal selfof everyday life. If some individuals or groups regu-larly experience their work or work products in thisway, there could be a payoff from which some corpo-rations or other organizations may derive benefit.

On the darker side of regional studies, long-terminvestigations of older regions depict work that hasbecome, perhaps, increasingly profane. Based on 10years of research in the region, Donald Stull and

Michael Broadway describe the modern meat andpoultry industry as it has developed within theAmerican central plains. The study takes an unflinch-ing look at the process of meat production today,comparing it with the slaughterhouse experiencedescribed by Upton Sinclair 70 years ago. Many thingsremain unchanged, especially the rigidly organized,labor-intensive factories that turn cattle and chickensinto human food on “disassembly lines.” This is ugly,grueling, dangerous work, where getting product outthe door counts more than workers’ physical safety.Language and cultural differences between largelyAnglo managers and primarily Asian and Mexicanhourly workers mean that there are two differentworkforces in a plant, with very different views aboutthe way in which a plant’s ideals of safety, productiv-ity, quality, and loyalty should be put into practice.These differences exacerbate the plants’ productivityand safety problems.

Building on the corpus of Stull’s work over much ofthe 1990s, Mark Grey takes a closer look at the experi-ence of Mexican immigrants inside this same industryand region. Despite its low wages and poor workingconditions, the meatpacking industry attracts signifi-cant numbers of immigrant workers. It also experi-ences some of the highest turnover rates in Americanindustry, sometimes surpassing 120% per year. Turn-over contributes to high accident rates and poor pro-ductivity, but management is not fully motivated toinvest in strategies that would reduce turnover signifi-cantly, due to the steady flow of low-wage migrantsfrom Mexico. Turnover is, in part, a reaction to poorworking conditions and labor relations in the plant.The management does not allow individual workers topersonally care for or improve the condition of theircutting tools, thus contributing to physical strain,injury, and accidents. These physical woes, in turn,contribute to turnover. Grey discovered, however, thatturnover also is a strategy used by migrants for theirown purposes. They work until they have saved a nestegg, then travel back to Mexico with these monies,where they reunite with their families, rest up from thehard work in the plants, and then travel north again,when they are sure to be rehired. This is a strategy thatenables the immigrants to earn and save far moremoney than they would in Mexico while not beingforced to remain completely trapped in low-wage,dead-end jobs. Anglo workers in the plant resent theimmigrants’ ability to escape managerial control andcreate a new kind of “seasonal work” for themselves.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


While the Silicon Valley studies and that of DonaldStull are longitudinal inquiries that represent basicresearch funded from various sources over manyyears, the work of Mark Grey is more strategic innature, focused on an underlying problem, andundertaken at the request of Hog Pride’s manage-ment. It is important to note that strategic researchmay combine both “basic” and “applied” goals; itpushes the envelope of knowledge but also focuseson pressing problems or issues. Sometimes the corpo-ration offers the invitation to begin a strategic study,and sometimes the anthropologist requests entry,with funding from federal agencies or an academicinstitution. In many strategic studies, anthropologistsgain access to corporate field sites in exchange forproviding recommendations to address the problemunder investigation; most often, these recommenda-tions are not published but are considered propri-etary. University-based anthropologists retain theright to publish research results, although the compa-nies usually have the right to review and comment onthe publication draft, so that proprietary informationis not released to the public.

As Grey himself explains, he had an opportunityto interview and observe the managers during hissojourn at the plant, and he discovered to his sur-prise that they were disinterested in making changesthat would enable maximum reductions in workerturnover, although he still made recommendationsalong these lines. The managers did not want to investthe funds required to reduce turnover below 60%annually, since this would cut into profit margins;they would prefer to reduce turnover moderately andcontinue to rely on a steady stream of low-wageimmigrants to “make their numbers.”

Grey’s research and that of others suggest thatanthropologists are, at last,“studying up” (conductingresearch on individuals and groups whose social statusand/or power in the context of the research site maybe above that of the anthropologist). Grey’s studyraises issues, however, regarding the costs that accrueto this privilege. Management, as Grey suggests, isubiquitous in problem-oriented research in corpora-tions. They provide access to the company, infor-mants, documents and archives, artifacts, and mayreview manuscripts for publication. A corporationmay have many levels of management, and, in largecorporations, there may be substantial differencesin power and authority between levels. Higher levelsof management generally have sufficient control over

funds and the access required to grant entry toanthropologists for purposes of research, whetherbasic or strategic. Academic anthropologists cannoteven get approval from their institutional reviewboards without management sign-off on studies, andwithout them, there are no publications. Manage-ment also may provide needed funds to supportresearch in the form of grants, contracts, or consul-tancies. There are many risks inherent in such situa-tions. Management may try to influence the projector its findings in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. Orthey might cancel or redirect a project in midstream ifthey don’t like the way it’s going or the sponsor getsreassigned or fired. A key issue is that no matter whatproblem the anthropologist is investigating, there is agood chance that someone in management is goingto be involved in the problem (one of the causal fac-tors) and may be right at the heart of it. This is due tothe fact that anthropologists typically do not take amanagement centric view of the situation, as observersfrom other disciplines might, and when such a view isabandoned, it turns out that serious problems ofteninvolve management in some way (how could it not beso, when management is in charge of the company?).

It is an obviously delicate matter to negotiate criti-cisms of management when management has somuch power in the context of the anthropologist’swork. Reactions to criticisms from management areunpredictable, depending upon the overall contextand on the relationship between the managementthat is sponsoring the research and the managementthat is being criticized. It might be feasible to presentthe criticism in an ethically responsible manner (forexample, without identifying individuals or sub-groups, and only identifying policies) and with felici-tous results. Or it might be that the anthropologistgets backed into a corner, where it is obvious that aparticular individual is culpable in a particular case.Indeed, the management may “set up” the anthropol-ogist for such a dilemma without the anthropologist’sprior knowledge. Possibly, the management couldbecome hostile toward the anthropologist and rejectboth her and her findings in a defensive backlash.More likely, the findings and recommendations willbe ignored, as the recommendations are found to betoo costly and/or infeasible for political and culturalreasons related to the self-interests of those in power.All of the factors mentioned above make this workdifficult, frustrating, and risky, and could help toexplain why there is not more of it after all these years.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Some anthropologists have concluded that strategicresearch on organizational behavior is impossiblebecause of the contradictions just described; othershave decided that it is too important not to takethe risk.

Anthropologists have not been silent on thesematters, and indeed these issues have been subjects ofconsiderable angst in the literature for several years,as more anthropologists have ventured into the worldof modern organizations. Tensions between anthro-pologists and powerful others in fact have promptedsome highly respected corporate-based anthropolo-gists to leave the field altogether (as discussed below).It is likely that the problems described above are onereason why anthropological studies of organizationalbehavior have not flourished in the way that studies ofconsumer behavior and design have in recent years.These latter areas also require encounters with man-agement, but they are less likely to run headlong intocriticisms of management since their focus is moresquarely on products, services, and consumers.

Another reason for the difficulty anthropologistshave had in studying organizational behavior andmanagement over the years may relate to the lack ofreceptivity anthropology has experienced in manage-ment departments within business schools, in con-trast to a more positive response in marketingdepartments. The difference may relate to the posi-tivist nature of management as a field, compared withmarketing that has made room for interpretiveapproaches that resonate with the more artistic andcreative side of that discipline (for example, advertis-ing). Management, after all, is about control, andanthropologists who have studied corporations neverhave agreed that “culture” can be controlled by man-agement. Indeed, we have asserted the opposite—culturally constituted meanings and social practicesare naturalistic phenomena that defy the rationalistgrasp of managers. Also, the anthropologists them-selves may be difficult to control (as described belowin the discussion of Xerox PARC). Thus, the anthro-pological approach to corporations is counter-cultural to management, and has not been embracedby many management departments, nor is it embracedby many practicing managers in the United States(although there continue to be exceptions, and thesemay be growing in number in some places).

Returning to the question of boundary crossing,there is one other especially salient boundary that hasbeen crossed in the literature on corporations—that

which separates management and the worker. Duringmuch of the 20th century, anthropologists were moreor less partisans in the continuing struggle betweenthese two classes of employees that coexist in businessorganizations. In Warner’s era, anthropologists oftenwere management centric in their views, followingMayo’s influence; Marxists held sway in the yearsbetween 1960 and 1980. The labor-managementstruggle has continued, as evidenced in some of theliterature discussed above, but emphasis on it ismuted, and anthropologists are no longer so polar-ized. The American workforce’s participation inunions is at its lowest level in the past half-century ormore, and almost by default, the focus of anthropolo-gists who work inside businesses is not labor rela-tions. What’s more, theoretical developments in thesocial sciences have encouraged the representation ofsocial actors (workers and managers) as agents withcomplex agendas, while methodological trends haveencouraged research collaboration with these samesocial actors; this in turn has meant that more pointsof view are taken into account in the conduct ofresearch. Thus, rather than focusing either on work-ers or managers and ignoring or caricaturizingthe other, anthropologists have tended to talk to bothgroups and include their voices in published work.As a result, we see that worker/agents may take advan-tage of situations to their own gain (Grey, Hamada),derive pleasure from creative interactions with mar-kets (Freeman, Coleman), and be capable of overrid-ing management to assert their own interests (Baba).We also discover that management/agents can bepawns in their own (or others’) game (Briody/Baba,Hamada), are constrained by forces beyond their con-trol (Caulkins), and may be motivated by social goalsthat transcend the individual quest for money andpower (English-Lueck, Darrah). In short, we have amore subtly textured view of the actors and relationsamong them, which is an indication of theoreticaland intellectual maturity in this subfield.

Ethnographically Informed Designof Products, Services, and Systems

Another stream of research and practice thatflowed from W. Lloyd Warner’s original inventionis sometimes known in the vernacular as “designethnography,” but may be more accurately describedas ethnographically informed product, service, andsystem design (including work systems). The empha-sis of research described in this section rests on the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


notion of a marriage between ethnography anddesign, a novel concept often attributed to collabora-tion between anthropologist Lucy Suchman and RickRobinson (the latter founded E Lab, later acquired bySapient). Design is a profession in its own right, and itcannot be limited to the design of products, services,and systems. Many other things can be designed—workprocesses, organizations, cities, policies, anything thathumans can make or imagine. Designers are “consid-ered creatives” in that there is an artistic aspect totheir work and their marriage with intellectuals andresearchers (anthropologists) is an interdisciplinarychallenge. The creation of “design ethnography” thusrepresents the birth of a new interdisciplinary sub-field that joins together anthropology and/or otherqualitatively oriented social sciences with the designprofession.

While on the surface, design of products andservices may seem far removed from the Hawthorneproject, its roots can be traced back to the decades-earlier efforts of Frederick Taylor and Elton Mayo toimprove interactions between people and equipmentin the production process. These early streams ofinvestigation on the “human factor” in productioneventually gave rise to the subfield of “human factors”research, a multidisciplinary offshoot of psychologythat identifies aspects of human psychology and itscontext that must be taken into account in the designand development of new products. Human factors isboth a field of study and an area of research anddevelopment in corporations that produce advancedtechnology for the market.

In the 1970s, one company that was committedto pushing the envelope of knowledge on humansfactors (broadly defined) surrounding advancedcomputing was Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center(PARC). PARC was interested especially in human-computer interaction and the development of artifi-cial intelligence to support this interface; they alsofunded graduate student interns in this and otherareas related to computing. The first anthropologygraduate student intern to work at PARC in the late1970s, Eleanor Wynn, focused her dissertation researchon office communications, which aligned with Xerox’sinterests in office automation and the “paperless office”concept. Wynn subsequently helped Gregory makecontacts in the Silicon Valley computer industryfor her dissertation research and was followed byLucy Suchman in 1979, an anthropology graduatestudent at University of California, Berkeley, who

initially was interested in office work practices butlater became intrigued with the idea of machine intel-ligence in a computing context. Suchman did notcome to PARC to study human factors, but her workradically reconstituted the nature of the design indus-try nevertheless.

Suchman established her formidable reputationat PARC by videotaping pairs of users attempting tomake copies of documents using an expert help systemand then comparing the users’ conversations andactions during this process with the machine’s auto-mated instructions. Suchman had been influenced byGarfinkle’s ethnomethodology, which provided themethodological framework for this investigation.Contrasting the two points of view side by side (thoseof the users and the machine), Suchman portrayedcommunication breakdowns between them, as humansmoved fluidly among several different levels of con-versation (for example, simple requests for action,“meta” inquiries about the appropriateness of a pro-cedure, and embedded requests for clarification ofprocedures) while the machine was severely limitedto producing responses that its designer had pro-grammed into it in anticipation of stereotypicalresponses that users “should” make. While theseobservations might not seem revolutionary now, theywere a lightning bolt at Xerox PARC and led the cor-poration to change the design of its copiers to makethem simpler to use. This research also gave Suchman areputation for bold and fresh insight and enabled herto expand the role of anthropology at Xerox PARC.

Suchman attracted other anthropologists whoseresearch further enhanced the reputation of PARC,including Jeanette Blomberg and Julian Orr (some ofOrr’s work was discussed in the previous section).Building on Suchman’s research, Jeanette Blomberginitiated a series of studies investigating the use oftechnology in organizational context. Her researchargued for the necessity of looking beyond the“human-machine dyad” in understanding how newtechnologies affect work and workers. This broaderdefinition of the human-machine problematic sug-gested the need for a new technology design strategythat made visible the social, organizational, and inter-actional dynamics of the workplace. The approachBlomberg developed with her colleagues Randy Triggand Lucy Suchman integrated techniques and per-spectives from work-oriented or participatory designoriginating in Scandinavia with ethnographic studiesof technologies-in-use. A central characteristic of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


their approach involved cycling between ethnographi-cally informed workplace studies and the developmentof design concepts and prototypes, with the activeparticipation of both workers and technology design-ers. Hugh Beyers and Karen Holtzblatt commercializedmany of the work-oriented design ideas pioneered bythe Work Practice and Technology group at XeroxPARC and the participatory design movement moregenerally through their firm, InContext Enterprises.

The work of this cohort of anthropologists at XeroxPARC, together with several others who joined bothPARC and the Institute for Research on Learning (forexample, Susan Irwin Anderson, Melissa Cefkin,Francoise Brun-Cottan, Chuck and Candace Goodwin,Bridgett Jordan, Patricia Sachs) became knownaround the world for its innovative integration ofanthropology and ethnography into the product andservice development stream of a major corporation.A breakthrough came in 1989 when the DoblinGroup of Chicago asked Xerox PARC to partner on aproject for Steelcase, the office furniture manufac-turer. Steelcase wanted to understand how the work-place of the future would evolve and what kinds ofwork environments and designs it should be thinkingabout over the long term. Jay Doblin was aware ofSuchman’s group at Xerox and wanted to bringethnographic skills into the engagement. Xerox PARCagreed to co-fund the project, which became knownas the Workplace Project. The project was situated inan airport, which was believed to have propertiesreflecting the workplace of the future (for example,high fluidity of people and information, workflowextending into multiple kinds of space via electronicmeans). Suchman served as lead on this project forseveral years, and through it she assembled a talentedinterdisciplinary group of social scientists (includingseveral anthropologists) and designers whose workwould revolutionize the design industry. One of theindividuals involved was Rick Robinson, then atDoblin, who subsequently went on to co-found E Labin Chicago, an entrepreneurial firm explicitly dedi-cated to the concept of equally balancing all productdesign projects with ethnographic research anddesign talent The notion that all new product andservice concepts should emerge from a contextuallyrich understanding of the client’s natural world,developed through ethnographic field research atclient sites, captured on videotape, and analyzedusing anthropological theory and methodology, wasfirst conceptualized by Suchman’s group in the

Workplace Project, but it was Rick Robinson who tookthis concept to the market and made it profitable.

The research in question often is undertaken byinterdisciplinary teams involving anthropologists andrepresentatives of other disciplines (for example, psy-chologists, designers, engineers, even clients may beinvolved). Ideally, this research seeks to acquire deeplynuanced, visually based, contextualized knowledge ofthe consumer’s or worker’s world, and to secure anunderstanding of underlying factors that influencethe consumer’s behaviors (which assumes someknowledge of social and cultural contexts in whichthe behavior is situated). The goal is to know bothwhat the consumer is doing and why he or she isdoing it, and from this base of knowledge to createnew ideas for product and service design conceptsand improvements. This approach, or a paler facsim-ile of it, has been copied by scores of firms all over theworld, not all of which take seriously the need to ana-lyze data using anthropological theory and method-ology, however. E Lab was purchased by Sapient in1999, but the idea of “design ethnography” nowbelongs to the world.

Ironically, the researchers at Xerox PARC did notconceptualize themselves as “applied anthropolo-gists,” for the most part, even though they arguablyhad a greater impact on business than any othergroup of anthropologists since W. Lloyd Warner andhis generation. The Xerox PARC group’s view wasthat they were part of the community of scholarsengaged in the anthropology of science, technology,and society studies, a field that was on the rise inanthropology during the 1980s and 1990s and isenjoying an academic renaissance at the present time.In those days, Xerox PARC was a relatively indepen-dent organization that permitted its scientists a greatdeal of intellectual autonomy. And indeed, perhaps itwas that very autonomy that contributed so much tothe wealth of creativity and high-value-added contri-butions this group made during its reign over thespan of more than a decade. With increasing globalcompetition, however, PARC and many other indus-trial labs came under increasing pressure to focusscientists’ efforts more sharply on the company’s crit-ical priorities. Suchman’s group was no exception.Although details remain to be written, reportedlytensions arose between Xerox PARC’s managementand Suchman’s research group regarding its futuredirection and plans. When the issues could not beresolved to everyone’s mutual satisfaction, the group

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


elected to disband itself, and the individual memberswent their separate ways, unleashing a diaspora of“creative destruction”—the diaspora both dismantledthe greatest business anthropology resource knownsince the Human Relations School while simultane-ously releasing the creative talent of many anthropol-ogists (and their ideas) to engage in other pursuits.

Today, the notion of integrating ethnography (and,it is hoped, anthropologically informed analysis) intothe design and development of new products,services, and workplaces or practices has becomeaccepted practice in high-tech companies in theUnited States. Susan Squires, for example, describeswork that represents the present form of designethnography in new product development. Squiresvisits a family kitchen at 6:30 AM with her video cam-era partner to observe and interview a former focusgroup participant in her natural setting, with her twosons. Many discoveries are made: the boys do not eatthe “wholesome breakfast” that Mom prepares; Momeats it herself, apparently unaware of what she isdoing; the boys actually eat other, not-so-wholesomefood (purchased by Dad), or nothing at all. In themidst of it all, Mom-in-law calls up to check on whatMom is cooking. Later, at one of the boys’ schools,Squires finds that the boy who ate nothing is consum-ing his lunch at 10:30 a.m. Squires provides a contex-tual analysis of this, plus other field data, relating herdiscoveries to structural strains in American societythat pit working women’s realities against older valuesregarding protection of family members. The out-come of the research is a new product, Go-Gurt, ayogurt-based snack that tastes good, is nutritious, andcan be consumed on the go.

Direct observation of natural behavior in the fieldenables anthropologists such as Squires to gain accessto a level of consumer behavior that is not reflected infocus group dialogue, where participants often shareidealized representations of their activities and maynot be able to report on behavior that is out of con-scious awareness. Videotaping routines in the homeor other natural settings for later analysis permitshighly detailed analysis of behavior and comparisonacross numerous field sites. Especially valuable isthe comparison of survey and focus group data withanalysis of ethnographic material; theoreticallygrounded knowledge of the broader socioculturalcontext and its emerging trends is necessary toexplain discrepancies between these sources andrelate them to client needs. Ethnographic research

places the consumer in a wider context that explainswhy people do what they do, not only what, and alsoprovides a deeper understanding of the value of cer-tain products and services in people’s lives.

In a very different application, Patricia Sachs’swork at Nynex illustrates the way in which an anthro-pological analysis of ethnographic data can informthe redesign of work systems. Customer repair workat Nynex became disjointed and inefficient when anew “trouble ticketing system” was introduced thatbroke down repair work into small pieces to be dis-tributed to disassociated individual workers. If aworker did not complete a repair job by the end of hisor her shift, the job was recycled to another worker,without an opportunity for the two workers to talk toone another. An activity analysis conducted by Sachsshowed that the whole activity surrounding repairwork, especially making sense of a problem throughconversations among multiple workers, is crucial insolving a customer problem efficiently. The newinformation system disrupted the natural activitypattern and made the problem resolution processmuch less effective.

The value of incorporating ethnography intoproduct development and work practices research hasbeen widely recognized in the design industry, somuch so that new firms have arisen that specialize indesign research, and many of them explicitly includeethnography. To what extent these “ethnographers”are anthropologists is a point of contention. Some-times it appears that being an ethnographer means awillingness and ability to go to a customer’s locationand observe, using a video camera. Contextual analy-sis of findings is strictly optional and not well under-stood or necessarily valued by the design firm or itsclients.

Ethnography for new products, services, andsystems or practices is generally focused on the indi-vidual or group level of analysis, that is, the user andhis or her interaction with a product or service, orthe work group, user group, or customer group incontext. This focus may be distinguished from theresearch stream in the previous category (organiza-tional behavior), which has been oriented towardan entire occupational category, or the enterprise orindustry level of analysis (for example, computerprofessionals, a biotechnology firm, the meatpackingindustry). There are both theoretical and method-ological affinities between these two streams (forexample, an occupation engages in a certain form of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


work practice), but there also are points of distinc-tion. One point of distinction is an emphasis onethnographic methodology in design work; forexample, a hallmark of Suchman’s group was closeanalysis of videotapes and transcripts (for example,frame-by-frame analysis of video). This emphasiscould have (inadvertently) made design research vul-nerable to representation by some as a methodology,per se, which in turn could have had the unfortunateeffect of turning it into a methodology in someminds, that is, “design ethnography” that can be doneby anyone who has a video camera. This did not hap-pen to research at the organizational level of analysis,which draws upon a wide range of methodologicaltraditions from many different disciplines and alsohas been much slower to diffuse.

Consumer Behavior and Marketing

In the Fordist era, firms were dominated by aproducer’s view of the world. Consumers and themarketplace were viewed as territory exterior to thebusiness, a place that products and services were sentoutward to. Often, firms made products first andthen looked for the consumers afterward, dictatingwhat consumers would have to accept. Now, becauseof ever-intensifying competitive pressures, companieshave been forced not only to listen to what consumerswant but also have come to view consumers as poten-tial sources of innovation that they must draw knowl-edge inward from. This new perspective on the valueof consumers, and the need for creative exchangeswith them, has transformed the way consumer behav-ior is conceptualized and acted upon as firms createnew products and services and take them to market.

Marketing also has changed. In the past, this fieldwas dedicated to the description of consumers’ deci-sions to purchase products, who buys what, and whatfactors influence the purchasing decision. Statisticalanalysis of survey data related to consumer demo-graphics was the predominant methodology. Theconsumer was a number on a spreadsheet. Firms sel-dom looked behind the numbers to understand whothe customer really was or why consumers made theirpurchasing decisions. But the shift to a consumer ori-entation has encouraged new approaches that gobeyond mere description of purchasing outcomes.Now, firms are interested in gaining a holistic under-standing of consumers’ lives in context and findingout what this may teach them about new opportuni-ties to create or improve products or how to make

new sales. There also has emerged a realization thatthe purchasing decision is but a single point in amuch more complex and expansive cycle of consump-tion that includes many other aspects (for example,production, acquisition, actual consumption or use,disposal), all of which must be understood if prod-ucts are to be improved for consumers’ well-being(and the firms’ as well). As a result, there is a growingreceptivity to inductive, qualitative approaches toconsumer behavior that permit exploration of newresearch questions and theory building. This meansthat anthropology and ethnography are in vogue. Topbusiness schools are teaching future business leadersthe value of participant observation, close reading,and interpretive summary, while the faculty are fol-lowing modern consumers into cyberspace, adaptingtheir methods as they go (for example, “netnogra-phy,” “cyber-interviewing.” One of the first movers inthis new marketplace for consumer knowledge wasthe entrepreneur-anthropologist Steve Barnett, whobegan in the late 1970s and early 1980s to developinnovative uses for an anthropologist’s window onconsumer behavior. At a series of entrepreneurialfirms where he directed teams of anthropologists (forexample, the Cultural Analysis Group at Planmetrics,Research and Forecasts [a division of Ruder, Finn andRotman], Holen North America), Barnett inventedwhat were initially unorthodox ways of observingconsumers and translating their behavior patterns forapplications in marketing and advertising campaignsfor major clients such as Campbell Soup, Procter &Gamble, Royal Dutch Shell, and Union Carbide. Forexample, in the early days, Barnett invented the“unfocus” group, in which a cross-section of a firm’smarket is placed in a video observation room with acollection of objects and then given a (usually bogus)task of some sort, for example write a booklet formiddle school students describing how electricity isgenerated, or build a “safe” nuclear reactor usingkitchen gadgets. Analysis of the videotape renderedideas to be turned into advertising images, forexample, a campaign to raise electricity rates drew onconsumers’ lack of knowledge on the subject, or acampaign to gain approval for a new nuclear energyplant was based on consumers’ desire to “lock” anyradiation inside. Some academic anthropologistswere quite uneasy with this kind of activity, believingthat events of the type described above did not meetthe proper standards of informed consent. However,Barnett was not doing “research” in the way this term

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


is generally defined, so it is not clear that such standardswould be applicable. Barnett developed the techniqueof placing video cameras in consumers’ homes and inshopping locations and interpreting thousands ofhours of videotape with frames drawn from anthro-pological theory (for example, symbolic action andritual). Such approaches are now standard in theindustry. Drawing on the paper trail Barnett skillfullyleft behind as proof of his own marketing know-how,John Sherry describes numerous ethnographic pro-jects undertaken by Barnett for various clients in the1980s and 1990s. In the early 1990s, Barnett movedto Nissan Motor Company, where he became directorof product strategy, helping Nissan to reconceptualizethe automobile as a cultural artifact. Barnett’s creativetalent helped to transform anthropology from anacademic discipline engaged with the theoretical sig-nificance of consumption to one of the most sought-after professions at the cutting edge of marketing andadvertising. He blazed a trail that many other anthro-pologists were soon to follow.

That consumption is a thoroughly cultural phe-nomenon has been recognized by anthropologicaltheorists for some time. American and Europeantheorists have underscored the centrality of con-sumption in the production and reproduction of cul-tural patterns of meaning and practice. The Britishanthropologist Daniel Miller argues that this “turn”represented a metamorphosis of anthropology, froma less mature state in which mass consumption goodswere viewed as threatening (that is, signifying boththe loss of culture and a threat to the survival ofanthropology) to a more enlightened outlook thatfrankly acknowledges consumption as the local idiomthrough which cultural forms express their creativityand diversity. This rather amazing about-face has per-mitted a confluence of interests between anthropol-ogy and the field of marketing, which in turn has shednew light on territory stretching far beyond the mereconsumption of goods in context. Material goods andservices in all phases of their life cycle (design, acqui-sition, maintenance, disposal) reflect cultural cate-gories and principles, and their usage reflects culturalpurposes.

Anthropologists have contributed much to anemerging interdisciplinary theory of consumer cul-ture, which may be defined as a family of theoreticalperspectives that define the relationships among con-sumer behavior, cultural meaning, and the market.This body of literature provides evidence of the role

that material goods and services play in the definitionof the self and the creation of a coherent sense ofidentity, even if one that is fragmented. Consumptionis especially integral to cultural patterns in theadvanced capitalist societies of the West, where indi-vidualism is prevalent and so much about the indi-vidual is ambiguous at birth. Consumption also is agenerative source of new cultural patterns that canreconfigure blueprints for action and interpretation.Consumers are not passive adopters of products, butactive innovators who also resist, mutilate, and recon-figure what they find in the market to suit theiremerging interests. As active coproducers, consumershave powerful impacts upon products, services, andcorporations. Anthropologists also have been intel-lectual leaders in explaining the ways in which insti-tutional and social structures influence consumption(for example, ethnicity, gender, class, age). Theirresearch has illuminated structures that channelconsumer thought and action and the influence suchstructures have on consumer experience. Indeed,there is sufficient literature now to underpin theproduction of a fulsome textbook that skillfully fusesanthropology and marketing into a seamless whole.The confluence of anthropological and marketinginterests was furthered especially by the work ofanthropologist Grant McCracken, who developed atheory to explain the “manufacture and movement”of meaning in the world of goods, including mecha-nisms by which meanings are transferred from cul-tural contexts to consumers in a two-stage process.McCracken postulated that meanings initially residein the culturally constituted world, from which theyare first moved to consumer goods by way of a pair ofmechanisms—the advertising system and the fashionsystem. In the advertising system, meanings are con-sciously attached to goods to differentiate them andenhance their attractiveness to consumers. The fash-ion system not only produces waves of new designsbut also cohorts of opinion leaders (for example,experts, journalists) to comment on these designsand their meanings, so that consumers will have arespected source to legitimize the meanings. Oncemeaning is attached to a good through these mecha-nisms, the meaning is then transferred to consumersby several other mechanisms in the second stage ofthe process. McCracken describes the mechanismsat this stage in terms of symbolic action or ritual,including a possession ritual (for example, announc-ing one’s inclusion or exclusion in a social group

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


through a purchase), an exchange ritual (for example,insinuating symbolic properties on to another personthrough a gift), a grooming ritual (for example, coax-ing value out of a good through utilization, such aspolishing one’s car), and a divestment ritual (forexample, erasing the aura of a former owner). Thistheoretical framework has been highly productive inexplaining empirical phenomena and generatinghypotheses for further research.

The emerging theory of consumer culture also wasadvanced by an important contribution from RussellBelk, Melanie Wallendorf, and John Sherry Jr. In theirseminal piece, anthropologist John Sherry and hissociologist and psychologist colleagues report on asummer spent touring sites of consumption acrossthe United States in an RV (the Consumer BehaviorOdyssey). One of their significant observations was apurported shift in the boundary demarcating thesacred and the profane in American life, with certainconsumer experiences being edged into what theydefined and described empirically as “sacred” space.Their paper provides theoretical and empirical evi-dence of dual processes—a secularization of religionand a sacralization of the secular. As sacred institu-tions become less potent as a social force, consumerslong to experience what they can only imagine.Consumption becomes an effort to obtain closurebetween reality and some imagined ideal state. Thus,in various cases, what appear on the surface to beordinary consumption events turn out to be, fortheir participants, extraordinary and even transcen-dent moments that promise powerful new purposesand directions in life, at least for that instant. InMcCracken’s model, this paper contributes both to anunderstanding of the culturally constituted world inwhich consumer meanings are constructed and alsohelps us understand how those meanings may bemoved to products by savvy marketers who canendow products with a sacred aura through creativeadvertising campaigns.

Another significant contribution of anthropologyhas been to critique and expand constructs underly-ing consumer behavior and marketing theory, basedon empirical research in non-Western societies. Forexample, Eric Arnould was among the first anthro-pologists to interpret his extensive, long-term ethno-graphic studies in West Africa for marketing audiences.In an early paper, he problematized the notion of“preference formation” (that is, how a consumerdevelops likes and dislikes, an idea that is central to

diffusion theory) by comparing the standard Westernview of this construct with both a local constructionthat is compatible with premarket sociocentric valuesand an Islamic ethnonationalist view, in which indi-viduals achieve status through innovations based on“Meccan” goods. Since then, Arnould has publishedan extended series of papers that draw upon ethno-graphic sources to shed new light on marketing con-cepts ranging from cross-border trade to relationshipmanagement, enabling an empirically based global-ization of the marketing literature.

The British anthropologist Daniel Miller is anespecially prolific scholar, with multiple volumes onvarious aspects of consumption, spanning the late1980s to the present. Beginning with his importantMaterial Culture and Mass Consumption, Miller hasshown how commodities, as other material forms, arecapable of acting as mythic structures, as classifica-tory systems that establish homologies among differ-ent models of sociality and as a means of objectifyingmoral values. For example, in The Theory of Shopping,Miller connects shopping to sacrificial ritual. Henotes that sacrifice has two central features—it placesthe sanctifier in a relationship with a transcendententity and thereby sanctifies the former, and it marksthe transition from production to consumption (forexample, firstfruits sacrifice). In shopping, whichusually is carried out by women, the shopper is linkedthrough bonds of love and devotion to a family, eitheran existing family or one that she hopes to have oneday. It is the underlying relationship that guides thewoman’s purchases, which are thoughtful and thrifty.And as in sacrifice, purchase of the commodity trans-forms it from an object of production to an object ofconsumption. While consumer goods may be mecha-nisms of alienation, discrimination, or control, thiscase suggests that a mature anthropology does notmake such judgments a priori.

Anthropologists also have produced literatureexploring more explicitly the mechanisms by whichadvertising firms move cultural meanings from theircontext into the realm of goods and services. In a volume based on observations by anthropologistsbased in advertising firms, Steve Kemper enhancesour understanding of the relationship between theglobal and the local by analyzing the presentationof goods by advertising firms to traditional popula-tions in the developing world. He uses the caseexample of pressed powder and scents in Sri Lanka,where the widespread diffusion of television has

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


opened opportunities for marketers to offer modernproducts to villagers for the first time. As Kemperexplains, the economic powers in the village (seniormales) could interpret certain products (cosmeticsfor young women) negatively, and refuse to providemonies for purchase, unless their advertisements areculturally sensitive. The effective advertisement usedneither the “global” image of a sophisticated urbanwoman nor the potentially condescending “local”image of a traditional village girl, but rather createdsomething that captured both the “local idiom” whilemanaging to be “generic” at the same time—the“sidevi look,” which combined images that aremodern enough to be attractive to a young womanbut still innocent enough to avoid offending herfather. Kemper explains that most advertising firms inthe developing world end up creating such imagesthat blend local and generic themes so that the endresult is neither the global homogenization that isfeared nor the local uniqueness that existed in thepast. This explanation provides an organizationalmechanism to account for the “globalization” phe-nomenon that anthropologists have reported in othercontexts.

Anthropologist Barbara Olson provides aninsider’s story of the role an advertising agency canplay in detecting cultural shifts taking place in themarket and translating those shifts into changes inmarketing technology that also moves products tothe consumer and facilitates further cultural change.Olson has a unique vantage point as an account exec-utive in an ad agency, one of whose clients was thebrassiere manufacturer Warner. When Warner firstcame to Olson’s agency in the 1960s, its image wasthat of a prudish, old-fashioned maker of “firm” prod-ucts for older women. Because these were the daysof women’s liberation and bra burning, Warner wasworried that their market was going to disappear. Ather suggestion, Olson’s agency began using anthro-pological techniques to gain a better understandingof the customer at the point of sale—inside the“upstairs” department stores (meaning, stores forupper-middle-class women). What they learned fromfieldwork was that these stores had experiencedstaffing cutbacks, saleswomen were harried andfatigued and had little time to provide individualattention required to show customers brassieres. Inthose days, bras were kept in drawers, out of sight,and customers had to take them into dressing roomsprivately to try them on. Olson’s agency suggested

that Warner put the bras on hangers and let thecustomers handle them without sales help—a some-what radical self-service concept that was already inplace at “downstairs” stores serving working-classwomen. But the idea was nixed out of hand by Warner’smale hierarchy; they believed their upscale customerswould never try on a bra that had already been triedon by another woman. Certain they had the right ideabased on fieldwork, however, Olson’s agency formedan alliance with a female department store buyer andpersuaded Warner to try the idea in test markets. Itwas a sensation, and took off beyond all expecta-tions, changing forever the way bras were marketedacross the industry. After the Warner’s campaign, itwas commonplace for upstairs stores to show lin-gerie in public. Consumers wanted convenience morethan they wanted privacy. Note the role played bythe agency in changing the minds of Warner executives.In the past, it was not unusual for (male) corporateexecutives to make decisions for (female) consumersabout whom they knew little or nothing (other thanwhat their wives might say). Olson’s agency (usinganthropology, and a woman anthropologist too)stopped Warner from making this mistake. Thisexample reveals the way in which anthropologicalapproaches are changing business practice and howthese practices in turn influence cultural patterns.

The literature in consumer behavior and market-ing produced by anthropologists has been wellreceived by marketing departments and corporations,with the result that anthropologists now hold positionsin the marketing departments of several major busi-ness schools (for example, University of Pennsylvania,Northwestern University, University of Nebraska,University of Utah).

It would appear that anthropology now is a perma-nent addition to the disciplines that comprise theacademic marketing field. Some of the ethical andpolitical difficulties that confront anthropologistsstudying organizational behavior are avoided by thosefocusing on consumer behavior, as access to corpora-tions may not be required (although this is less true ifthe anthropologist is a full-time practitioner). This isa distinct advantage that recommends this type ofwork. There are drawbacks, however. One relates tothe uneasiness that some anthropologists sense inthe use that may be made of their work in ethicallyquestionable sales (for example, products that maycause harm). Yet, such risk is inherent in the produc-tion of all knowledge and its utilization, and this is no

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


different. A more troublesome issue concerns theprefabricated consumption “experiences” that arebecoming almost a total institution in America. Notonly do these threaten a numbing down that maymask social control; they also may encode sacraliza-tion messages that, in fact, are hollow. In truth, theidealized images that consumption seeks to quenchcan rarely be satisfied by the act of consumptionalone. The desire to consume is insatiable. While thismay be a place we have been before, anthropology hasnot been so entangled in the mechanisms by whichconsumption is produced, and for some anthropolo-gists, it is not a comfortable place to be.

Convergence of the Domains

During much of the Cold War era, corporations andconsumption were neglected subjects in anthropol-ogy, even though it was obvious to all that these forcespowerfully shaped the lives of anthropologists andthe peoples we studied. W. Lloyd Warner’s discoveryof the corporation as one of two distinctive Americaninstitutions was forgotten as anthropologists inter-ested in modern societies aligned against capitalism,and many deemed research inside businesses “unethi-cal.” Consumption was at best esoteric exotica, forother reasons discussed previously. This ratherstrange state of affairs in which anthropologistsseemed to disregard some of the most potent culturalforces of our age was bound to change sooner or later.

Over the course of the past 20 years, the relation-ship between business and anthropology has come ofage. That is to say, a productive relationship hasformed, yielding advances in the state of knowledgeand practice. This has happened because of changesin the world and changes in anthropology. The open-ing of the post-Fordist era meant destruction of anolder economic order and the birth of a new one,with the inclusion of Asia and other parts of thedeveloping world as major economic and technologi-cal platforms of global production and consumption.Ever curious, and going where the action is, anthro-pologists have been true to the disciplinary mission—seeking the edge of the frontier and exploring theunknown. Our epistemological strengths enable us togo where few have gone before, and that is exactly wherewe are in the world of corporations, design, and con-sumers. The discipline has adjusted to admit observa-tions from these field sites for a variety of reasons.There is, perhaps, less theoretical and philosophical

polarization now, as the end of the Cold War and therise of critical theory gradually have expanded the“zone of contact” between those who were alignedwith Marxian ideology and those committed to othertheoretical and philosophical frames. Managementjournals now publish critical theorists who “studydown” in companies, while anthropology journalspublish cultural materialists who “study up” in thesame types of firms. Boundaries are permeable andlines between categories are blurred, inside anthro-pology as everywhere else. Another influence on therelationship between business and anthropologyhas been the diaspora of the so-called institutionalanthropologies. Postmodernism and critical theory inother disciplines have had the interesting effect ofmaking anthropology very attractive elsewhere (evenas it sometimes appeared that anthropology itselfwas about to self-destruct). A centrifugal pull out-ward toward other fields has been in motion for thepast two decades, leading many anthropologiststo become hybrids, complete with graduate degreesin other fields (for example, medicine, law, socialwork, education). One kind of hybrid is the businesstype, but this is just a specialized instance of a muchwider phenomenon that is in the process of remak-ing anthropology and has accompanied the rise ofapplied and practicing anthropology more generally.Hybrids admit external influences into anthropology,and if/when these reach a critical mass, hypotheti-cally, there could be a tipping point at which anthro-pology changes in a qualitative way. A final force forchange is the pragmatic need to place academia’sgraduates. If graduates cannot find jobs, then acade-mia ultimately will shrink, so it is in the interests ofacademic anthropologists to gradually explore thenew terrain of corporations, design, and consump-tion, and academic administrations will support thisif it bears the right kind of fruit (stratified by institu-tion, of course).

A look back over the long history of entanglementsbetween business and anthropology shows manyironies. One is that the small world investigated byWarner and company (that is, labor-managementrelations in the context of Mayo’s Human Relationsmovement) held the promise of leading themperhaps to a deeper understanding of modern insti-tutions. Warner attempted to fulfill this vision in hisYankee City studies, but anthropology turned its backon these interests, abandoning them to sociology andthe policy disciplines. It is ironic that the “turn” we

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


have seen in the past 20 years toward consumptionstudies, which did not even exist in Warner’s time,now constitutes perhaps the most ambitious theoreti-cal agenda for exploring modern American societythat anthropology has yet produced. While there are arelatively small number of anthropology scholars atthe forefront of modern consumption studies, theirwork has inspired a vast body of interdisciplinaryresearch that enables us to better comprehend themechanisms through which markets mediate the cre-ation of meaning and social practice within a broadersociohistorical frame of globalization and marketcapitalism. This did not happen because anthropolo-gists decided to study modern society, but becauseanthropologists finally acknowledged consumptionas relevant to their interests. In America, it also mustbe acknowledged that it happened because anthro-pologists joined the fields of consumer behavior andmarketing in business schools.

Another irony lies in a backward look at theHawthorne studies. Anthropologists were not run-ning the show in those days, and today we know that“the boss” was wrong. Mayo (the boss) saw theBWOR workers as “maladjusted,” but he was misin-formed. The workers knew what they were doing. Theproblem is, no one told American managers the truth.Most managers are not trained to grasp the idea of“cultural logic” on the shop floor or in the office,even though they are trained to grasp that samenotion in relation to the marketplace. That is ironic.If alternative explanations of Hawthorne had beenadvanced in the 1930s and anthropology had played amore decisive role in shaping the theory of organiza-tions over the next several decades, the workplacethat we know might be very different today, andanthropologists who study organizational behaviormight be thriving like their counterparts in market-ing. We must ask ourselves about the long-termimplications of an anthropology that is perpetuallymarginalized in studies of private sector organiza-tions and management.

What seems clear from an overview of the literatureis that the worlds of consumers and producers are nottwo separate things. Consumption and productionare intertwined, perhaps most clearly in the designprocess, which brings the producer (designer) andconsumer (user) together in a collaborative juxtaposi-tion. The service economy also represents the joiningof these worlds, as one conceptualization of service isthe simultaneous production and consumption of an

economic activity within the context of a relationshipbetween a producer and a consumer (for example,teaching/taking a course). All of this suggests thatthe intersection of these two worlds is expected tobecome increasingly apparent as the 21st centuryevolves away from a Fordist producer orientation,with its mechanistic and functionalized view of theworld, and toward a more integrated, holistic per-spective encouraged by a consumer orientation.Thus, while the three domains described hereinwill continue as distinct subfields with their ownliteratures, increasing areas of interaction and overlapamong them are predicted. Anthropology, as a holis-tic discipline, is in a good position to conceptualizethe connections among the domains; indeed, theyalready were apparent in this entry. For example,both design and consumption are activities that oftentake place within organizational contexts. Under-standing these contexts—the resources or opportuni-ties, as well as the risks or constraints they pose—aresignificant considerations for anthropologists seekingan integrated assessment of human behavior in itsnatural setting. Furthermore, organizations them-selves are human constructions that are objects ofdesign, and they also are sites of consumption. Withrespect to their designed nature, the formal and infor-mal structures and policies of organizations arecontinuously being formed and reformed. Theseunfolding processes could become sites of ethno-graphic research, toward the goal of improving out-comes in organizational decision making as it affectsthe design of new products and services and theoffering of these outputs to market.

Consumption also should become increasinglyrelevant as a focus of anthropological and ethno-graphic inquiry within organizational settings. Ascorporations outsource their services to one another,each organization “consumes” their suppliers’ services.While this may sound somewhat abstract and “busi-ness-to-business” in nature, on the ground it canbecome very individualistic and person-to-person—say, for example, someone in Chicago trying to obtainhelp over the telephone from someone else inBangalore. This interaction represents the consump-tion of one organization’s service by another organi-zation. If we begin to conceptualize the convergenceof consumption and production, we may be able tobring to our study of organizations the theoreticaland methodological insights gained through thestudy of consumer behavior, a theoretical maneuver

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY AND EPISTEMOLO GY 117

that has not been optimally exploited in the studyof organizations. An example of the potential ofthis kind of crossover was provided earlier in thenotion of the sacralization of work in America. CarlaFreeman’s research provides another example of thepotential of investigating consumption practiceswithin a production context. Daniel Miller discussedmany additional examples.

Since the broader context of our lives is connected,there should be resonance among the various facetsof our experience. And if globalization indeed meansthat boundaries are blurring, then the boundariesbetween employees and consumers, between theinteriors and the exteriors of the firm, are blurringas well, and anthropologists who are interested inorganizational behavior, ethnographically informeddesign, and consumer behavior, may gain insights byspending more time talking together and readingeach other’s work.

— Marietta L. Baba

Further Readings

Arnould, E., Price, L., & Zinkhan, G. (2002).Consumers. Boston: McGraw-Hill.

Friedman, J. (Ed.). (2003). Globalization, the state,and violence. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.

Jordan, A. (2003). Business anthropology. ProspectHeights, IL: Waveland.

Malefyt, T. D., & Moeran, B. (2003). Advertisingcultures. New York: Berg.

Olson, B. (2003). The revolution in marketingapparel: A narrative ethnography. In T. Malefyt &B. Moeran (Eds.), Advertising cultures. Oxford,UK: Berg.

Schwartzman, H. (1993). Ethnography inorganizations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Sherry, J., Jr. (1995). Contemporary marketing andconsumer behavior: An anthropological sourcebook.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Squires, S., & Byrne, B. (Eds.). (2002). Creatingbreakthrough ideas: The collaboration ofanthropologists and designers in the productdevelopment industry. Westport, CT: Bergin &Garvey.

Stull, D., & Broadway, M. (2004). Slaughterhouseblues: The meat and poultry industry in NorthAmerica. Belmont, CA: Thompson/Wadsworth.

Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions: Theproblem of human-machine communication.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY AND EPISTEMOLOGY

Epistemology is that discipline of philosophy devotedto the nature of knowledge and how we acquire it.It is further divided into prescriptive and descriptiveepistemology. Rules of how to proceed to acquireknowledge are called “methods,” and hence a pre-scriptive epistemology is a “methodism.” Descriptiveepistemologies are sometimes referred to as “sociol-ogy of knowledge,” although many descriptive episte-mologies are not sociological.

The field derives from three main sources. One isthe work of ethologist Konrad Lorenz, who wrote thatthe synthetic a priori judgments of Kant are the a pos-teriori results of evolution. That is to say, our “innate”ideas, which are not the basic theorems of logicalnecessity, are the outcome of selection on humancognition and that of our ancestors.

Another is the program begun by philosopherWillard Van Ormand Quine, to “naturalize” epistemol-ogy, based on the work of Carnap and the Pragmatists.Quine famously wrote that “creatures inveteratelywrong in their inductions have a pathetic, but praise-worthy, tendency to die before reproducing theirkind” (Quine, 1969 p. 126).

Under the influence of Karl Popper and Donald T.Campbell, a number of thinkers proposed to modelepistemic, and especially scientific, change as a selec-tion process. Early on, Popper presented a selectiontheory of theory change in which scientific theoriesare subjected to strong selection pressures throughtesting, so that the fittest theories survive. In laterworks, he repeated this view, which can arguably betraced back to comments in his 1934 edition of Logikder Forschung. He attempted to argue that biologicalmutations also follow a pattern of anticipatory behav-ioral change followed by genetic “hopeful monsters,”in order to make a parallel with theory change. A con-jecture, he said, is an anticipatory behavioral change,while the formalized and tested theory is the trans-missible entity in conceptual evolution; so he had toshow that biological evolution could anticipate thefuture. The “modern synthesis” rejected this hopefulmonsterism, and recent research has backed that up.If biological evolution were purposive, then an expla-nation in terms of the underlying harmony or orderof things might indeed suffice to confirm anticipatorychange, and by analogy the same could be true oftheory change.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY AND EPISTEMOLO GY118

Beginning largely in the 1970s, attempts weremade to bring evolutionary models to broader episte-mology, misleadingly called by Donald Campbell“evolutionary epistemology” (EE). The term misleadsbecause, like evolutionary ethics before it, it is an oxy-moron; where it is evolutionary, it is descriptive, andhence not classical epistemology, and when it is pre-scribing epistemic rules and heuristics, it is not (in theDarwinian sense) evolutionary, as what has worked inthe past is not necessarily a guide to truth or what willwork in the future. Moreover, the movement has twobroad streams: one concerned with the evolution ofcognitive processes (especially those dear to empiri-cists; vision and the other senses), the other anattempt to provide an evolutionary process model ofthe growth (or less prejudicially, the development) ofknowledge. Bradie distinguished between evolution-ary evolution of mechanisms (EEM) and evolutionaryepistemology of theories (EET).

Epistemic evolutionists accept that there area number of fundamental disanalogies betweenDarwinian biological evolution and theoretical evolu-tion, especially in science, although there is consider-able disagreement about the number and nature ofthese disanalogies. Some consider that the evolution-ary development of our cognitive mechanisms is, atbest, merely sufficient to ensure our survival (or thatour more abstract cognitive faculties are pleiotropicupon those faculties required for survival) and thattheoretical evolution is so decoupled from biologicalevolution that our biologically constrained intuitionis repeatedly undermined by theories of science. Forexample: “solid objects” are mostly space, colors arewavelengths of light, and so forth. Hence, the reliabil-ity of our senses is not established by our (biological)evolutionary success. This decoupling of theoretical(and more broadly of cultural) evolution from bio-logical evolution is further supported by the sup-posed Lamarckian nature of the former. To thisextent, almost without exception, epistemic evolu-tionism is not Darwinian; that is to say, it posits non-Darwinian processes either of epistemic variation,selection, or hereditability or some mix of these.

Under the cultural Lamarckist model, either thevariation is not random with respect to the selectionprocesses (it is directed toward problem solving, andhypotheses act like Goldschmidt’s now discredited“hopeful monsters,” anticipating the selective pro-cesses either behaviorally or phenotypically) or theselection process is not blind (theories are chosen on

endogenous rational grounds, not on exogenous andcontingent considerations. That is, the optimumfuture theory is sought by the process rather than thecurrently merely adequate, as in biology, or theoriesare not causally determined in transmission (thosereceiving the theories are agents who may rationallyreject or modify the information coded for by thecultural items passed on).

Some other major claimed disanalogies include(1) the fact that a single theoretician may entertain asequence of theories over his or her lifetime, unlike anorganism that has a specific phenotype; (2) that thereis lateral as well as vertical transmission (we are influ-enced by our peers as well as earlier generations); and(3) that there are a lack of corollaries for “ecology,”“resources,” “competition,” genes, and other funda-mental concepts of the biological Darwinian viewand that proposals for analogues are vague andinvolve a lot of hand-waving but very little rigor.

Many evolutionary epistemologists accept withPopper that guided cultural transmission underpinsa directed evolution of science, and that it makesabsolute progress, and that progress and its telicnature are the result of conscious rational decisions,in contrast to the undirected, unconscious, and blindworkings of Darwinian biology. Given this basic dif-ference of mechanism and process, it is difficult to seewhy these writers would want to call their epistemo-logical evolution theories “Darwinian” at all. Each ofthem admits that the process involved is not blind,either in the selection or generation of variations.

In effect, these views fall within two of threeincreasingly more inclusive sets: they are process epis-temologies, they are selective epistemologies, but theyare not Darwinian epistemologies (in contrast toDavid Hull’s account of science, perhaps the bestexample of a purely descriptive evolutionary episte-mology. That is, the processes they posit as selectionprocesses in science are not Darwinian processes.A process epistemology explains knowledge as theoutcome of dynamic and historical (diachronic)processes: the historical and causal chains that havebrought it about. Process epistemologies have a nec-essarily sociological character to them; knowledge isseen as the production of a community (an ecology),not of an individual, however brilliant. A selectiveepistemology is one in which epistemic change is theresult of selective retention. A Darwinian epistemol-ogy is one that claims that variation and retention arenot purposive with respect to the overall outcome of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY AND EPISTEMOLO GY 119

change; that is, intentions do not determine thesuccess of final product.

Evolutionary epistemology is basically an attemptto show that the Kantian a prioris are the phyloge-netic a posterioris, as Lorenz expressed it. In otherwords, it seeks to legitimate Kantian categories (orsome equivalent) as constraints brought about bysevere selection processes, survivors of which are themost robust and probably the most reliable. In thisway, EE attempts to avoid Humean difficulties withinduction-like heuristic justifications: To justify yourheuristic, merely establish its provenance and successrate to date. In this, there is a severe difficulty for epis-temic evolutionism: In no organism that results frombiological evolution is full cohesion or optimalityachieved; why should even a Lamarckian process suc-ceed in science? Why should directed evolution workany better (except in that it would be faster) than anundirected evolutionary process, unless, of course,the director is God or some such omniscient factor?Directed or undirected, the success of an evolutionaryadaptation lies in the “solution” of problems similarto those for which the adaptation was first selected.

If an epistemology is a modeling of what an ide-ally or realistically successful heuristic looks like, andit makes prescriptions of the kind “in order to bestachieve knowledge of kind k, use rules and methodsh,” then evolutionary epistemology is ill-founded, forsuch prescriptions simply cannot be drawn fromDarwinian or any other biological theory. A case inpoint is the repeated insistence that socioculturalevolution must be Lamarckian. By this is usuallymeant that sociocultural change is a process of artifi-cial selection, to the specifications of evolutionary“engineers” (scientists, social planners, economists,and shadowy controlling figures in industry). Yetartificial selection is a subset of “natural” selectionprocesses, albeit rather more severe than the usualprocess of natural selection. A breeder may achievequickly a certain coloring or ear length, but the resul-tant animal may also be fragile or disease ridden. Toachieve a robust variation may still take a long timeand much trial and error. Nothing about artificialselection gives us confidence that fitness will be morereliably gained than it would be through undirectedselection. It is possible that sociocultural selection ofrational variations is as random as natural selectionis with respect to the selection forces operative. Theselection process relevant to macroevolutionarytrends in sociocultural systems is of a quite different

order than for the selection involved at the individuallevel in generating and choosing beliefs. If intention-ality in variation is decoupled from the success ofthe selection outcome—wishing a theory to be true(in any relevant sense) does not make it so—theneven a Lamarckian epistemic evolutionism fails toestablish how success to date underpins the warrantof any methodological morals drawn from thepast. As philosopher Hilary Putnam has expressed it,it’s not that evolutionary epistemology is false, butrather that it fails to answer the philosophicallyinteresting questions (such as why we should believeour selected ideas or whether they are in fact correct,or merely help us survive). There are a number ofcritics of evolutionary epistemology, and a compre-hensive bibliography can be found in Cziko andCampbell.

— John S. Wilkins

See also Lorenz, Konrad; Popper, Karl

Further Readings

Bradie, M. (1994). The secret chain: evolution andethics, SUNY series in philosophy and biology.New York: SUNY Press.

Cziko, G. A., & Campbell, D. T. (1990).Comprehensive evolutionary epistemologybibliography. Journal of Social and BiologicalStructures, 13(1), 41–82.

Hull, D. L. (1988). Science as a process: An evolutionaryaccount of the social and conceptual development ofscience. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lorenz, K. (1965). Evolution and modification ofbehavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

O’Hear, A. (1999). After progress: Finding the old wayforward. London: Bloomsbury.

Plotkin, H. C. (1994). The nature of knowledge:Concerning adaptations, instinct, and the evolutionof intelligence. Harmondsworth, UK: AllenLane/Penguin.

Popper, K. R. (1972). Objective knowledge: Anevolutionary approach. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Radnitzky, G., & Bartley W. III. (Eds.). (1987).Evolutionary epistemology, rationality, and thesociology of knowledge. La Salle, IL: Open Court.

Wuketits, F. M. (1984). Concepts and approaches inevolutionary epistemology: Towards an evolutionarytheory of knowledge, theory, and decision library(Vol. 36). Dordrecht, The Netherlands, Boston:D. Reidel.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY AND THE THIRD WORLD120

4 ANTHROPOLOGY AND

THE THIRD WORLD

Origins and Evolutionof the Concept “Third World”

The term Third World (tiers etat) was coined in 1952by Alfred Sauvy, a French demographer, to describethe poor, marginalized, and powerless class of prerev-olutionary France. Its meaning expanded rapidly todenote areas of the world that were distinct from theindustrialized capitalist countries, the First World,and from communist bloc nations that formed theSecond World. This new way of talking about disen-franchised peoples of the world caught on rapidly andwas used by social scientists at the 1955 Conference ofAfro-Asian Countries in Brandung, Indonesia. A newjournal, Le Tiers Monde, launched in 1956, provideda forum to explore the conditions of impoverishedpeoples of the tiers monde—Africa, Asia, Oceania, andLatin America—who, much like the commoners ofthe French third estate, le tiers etat, lived under condi-tions of oppression while their labor supported themore affluent social classes.

Discussions about the state of the Third Worldamplified and quickly moved from a focus on eco-nomic and social issues to reflect the political tensionsthat characterized the Cold War era and pitted capi-talist nations (Western Europe, the United States,Canada, Australia, and Japan) against their communistantagonists (Russia and other communist countriesthat formed the USSR). Some Third World countries,wishing to remain outside the sphere of influenceof these “superpowers,” came together as the Non-Aligned Nations, thus formalizing the division ofthe world into three distinct political arenas. Theterm nonaligned, used to indicate the political neu-trality of these nations, was at best an ideal. Capitalistand communist countries vying for control of ThirdWorld politics and economies and looking to expandtheir sphere of influence formed often shifting allianceswith poor countries in return for economic support.These rivalries continued until the collapse of theSoviet Union that began with glasnost and pere-stroika in 1986 and ended in 1989 with the fall ofthe Berlin Wall.

However, the First World/Third World distinctionsand dynamics survived these changes and still influ-ence contemporary geopolitical patterns.

Patterns That CharacterizeThird World Countries

Third World nations share some broad characteris-tics. Most were at one time European colonies andshare a postcolonial legacy of political instability andrepressive governments. They fall within a wide spec-trum. While some of these countries are now stable,others are burgeoning democracies. A large numberof Third World countries still struggle under dictato-rial governments and lack well-organized politicalstructures. Civil wars and ethnic conflicts are yetother legacies of both colonization and the arbitraryrepartition of traditional lands. Weak political infra-structures are often associated with less engagedcivil societies and a lack of national identity—pittingpredatory states against exploited and voicelessmasses. Most people in the Third World still do nothave access to appropriate sanitation, clean waterand electricity, good roads, and communication.They have experienced rapid shifts toward exportproduction at the expense of production for localconsumption and traditional methods that used toensure sustainability. These changes inevitably leadto marginal economies characterized by high unem-ployment rates, low per capita income, and loss ofproductive potential. Furthermore, most people inThird World countries experience dire poverty andhave little hope of improving their socioeconomicstatus; wealth and valuable resources are in the handsof small elites that also control politics, government,and trade. This uneven distribution of resourcesleads to social imbalance and a system reminiscent ofcolonialism.

Compared to Western countries, Third Worldcountries tend to have high population density.Family planning methods to curb birth rates are noteasily accepted in areas where large families are stillpreferred. Problems associated with the shift awayfrom traditional patterns of production towardindustrialization and export production also lead todemographic shifts from rural areas toward urbancenters. As peasant farmers find it increasingly moredifficult to support their families, they are drawn tocities and export zones in search of jobs in the manu-facturing industries and assembly plants controlledby multinational corporations. Export-free manufac-turing zones dot the landscape of many Third Worldcountries. They employ predominantly low-skilled,poorly educated female workers at minimal wages

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY AND THE THIRD WORLD 121

under generally unhealthy working conditions.Workers are not protected by labor laws and arestrongly discouraged from forming bargaining units.In other words, multinational companies exploit avulnerable labor force, and national governmentsoffer little or no support to the workers. It is estimatedthat in Haiti, for example, close to 80% of the popula-tion are unemployed or marginally employed and liveon less than $1 a day. These conditions set ThirdWorld countries at the margins of the world economywith little hope of improvement without outside aid.

The past 40 years have also witnessed the rapid,uncontrolled, and unplanned growth of several citiessuch as Mexico City, Calcutta, Lagos, and Cairo.Unemployment and underemployment as well assevere overcrowding in these hyperurbanized areaslead to social problems such as violence, ecologicaldegradation, delinquency, and civil unrest. Poverty,hopelessness, and a search for a brighter future alsocontribute to migration toward more industrializedand developed areas of the world, where workersperceive that their chances at upward mobility, educa-tion, and freedom are much higher.

People of the Third World have limited access toWestern medicine, and preventable diseases such asmalaria and parasitic diseases, which have disap-peared in industrialized nations, contribute to highmortality and short life expectancy. In some parts ofthe Third World, the majority of pregnant women donot receive prenatal care and give birth at home withthe help of traditional birth attendants. In these areas,infant and maternal mortality rates are high whencompared to those in industrialized nations. Otherpoor health indices mainly associated with poverty,ecological degradation, and poor infrastructuresinclude high rates of infectious diseases such asHIV/AIDS, STIs, tuberculosis, cholera, and malnutri-tion. Treatment and medicines available in Westerncountries are far beyond the budgets of most poornations, further pushing them at the periphery ofthe world system. Women in general suffer more fromthe consequences of these conditions than men andare also more vulnerable to violence and exploitation.In most of the Third World, women carry the bruntof child care while also responsible for productionand household chores. They tend to suffer more frommalnutrition than men, earn less than men, and havefewer rights than men.

While it is relatively simple to identify First Worldcountries—they are few in number and most are

located in Europe and the northern hemisphere, theThird World is more heterogeneous and diverse.Some of the countries that fall under this rubric areindeed very poor—Haiti, Tanzania, and Bolivia, forexample—while some Gulf States nations are quitewealthy; some Third World countries are overpopu-lated and have high birth rates and others are smallnations with low population densities.

By contrast, wealthier, industrialized nationssuch as the United States, Canada, Western Europe,Australia, and Japan are known as the First World.Nations in this group are considered establisheddemocracies, have stable economies, are industrial-ized, and have well-developed infrastructures. Medicalcare is available to the majority of people, and healthprevention measures such as prenatal care and immu-nization against childhood and some contagiousdiseases contribute to higher life expectancy and lowmaternal and infant mortality rates. Unemploymentin these areas is lower than in the Third World, andliteracy rates are much higher.

The Second World dissolved with the fall of com-munism at the end of the 1980s, and the 1990s saw arealignment of strategic parts of the world. Allegiancesto socialist principles as well as political and eco-nomic interests that united Soviet bloc countries andprovided cohesion to this group were challenged.Former members of this group gradually claimedtheir independence from Russian domination andjoined the ranks of democratizing countries. Whilesome former Soviet nations with stronger economiesare in transition toward First World status, many,especially in the autonomous regions of Asia andEastern Europe, joined the ranks of Third Worldcountries. Other communist countries like China andCuba and some African countries that had strong tiesto Russia chose to retain Marxist ideologies andsocialist economies.

Some problems are becoming global and cut acrossthe division between rich and poor nations. A 1999report published by the International Forum onGlobalization Studies shows that global consumptionof water is doubling every 20 years, at more than twicethe rate of human population growth. According tothe United Nations, more than 1 billion people onEarth already lack access to fresh drinking water. Atthe current rate of use, it is estimated that by 2025 thedemand for fresh water will rise by 56%. Regardless oftheir status, all the countries of the world are vulnera-ble to the predicted water shortage. It is a far more

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


serious threat to the world’s health, agriculture, andindustrial production than the current world depen-dency on oil. In Third World countries, people alreadyspend a significant share of available resources topurchase drinking water or spend a great deal oftime fetching water. As the water crisis intensifies,governments around the world—under pressure frommultinational corporations—are advocating a radicalsolution: the commercialization and mass transportof water. This could have devastating impacts onalready precarious small economies and on the healthof poor people. Already, in the maquiladora zones ofMexico, water is so scarce that babies and childrendrink Coca-Cola and Pepsi instead. Already, morethan 5 million people, most of them children, die everyyear from illnesses caused by drinking poor-qualitywater. Already, water shortages and the diversion ofwater from agriculture to industrial productionthreaten grain production in China.

The hegemonic influence of the First World is illus-trated in the changes that are happening throughoutThird World countries as traditional cultures andmodes of production are abandoned in exchange formore valued Western practices. Westernization andglobalization are changing the face of traditional cul-tures. The encroachment of Western cultural patternsand technology influence how Third World peopleview themselves and their cultures. They continue toadopt Western goods, technologies, and attitudes tothe detriment of local customs. Trade and industrial-ization alter traditional forms of production, andsmall economies are forced into the world system,albeit at the margins of this system.

Theories of Underdevelopment

Why are some countries stable and wealthy whileothers are so poor? Perceptions of the Third Worldand explanations for its slower pace of developmentare strongly influenced by Western scholars, and notmuch attention is given to the voice and perspectivesof Third World intellectuals. Anthropologists offerdifferent interpretations of the dynamics betweenWestern and non-Western countries, rich and poornations. The language used to describe these dynam-ics is at best awkward and often creates more prob-lems than it solves. Each set of terms used tocharacterize this dialectic reflects a particular dis-course and a way of seeing the world. Each set ofopposites is therefore value laden and biased. Theterm Third World stresses the hegemonic nature of

the relationship between rich and poor countries andis often contested by people in Third World countries.However, alternative terms such as underdevelopedand developed, developing and industrialized, orcountries at the center and countries at the peripheryof the world system also highlight the hierarchicalnature of First and Third World relationships.Anthropologists writing from the periphery of theworld system have used a North-South opposition tocritique the effects of postcolonial dynamics that per-petuate inequities and exploitation. In this scheme,countries of the North tend to be former colonialpowers and have well-developed economies andgeopolitical interests. Countries of the South aremostly former colonies, tend to have weak economies,and are more apt to rely on former colonial powers andWestern countries for trade and financial assistance.

Rather than ranking societies according to howrich or poor they are, the nature of their political ide-ologies, or who their allies are, some anthropologistssuggest discussing instead how the twin processes ofcolonization and industrialization differentially affectthe ability of some countries to build the kinds ofinfrastructures that distinguish poor nations fromrich ones. Others have noted the limitations of defin-itions that compare and rate countries in terms ofeconomic indices and level of technological develop-ment; they note that such typologies tend to devalueculture and the human experience.

Since the end of World War II, relations betweenindustrialized nations and Third World countrieshave been influenced and mediated by the discourseand practice of “development.” Development is oftenassociated with industrialization and modernity.Some current in anthropology sees development as“improvement in human well-being” and its counter-part, underdevelopment, as a state of mind. Theyquestion why some countries develop while others lagbehind and suggest that specific cultural patterns andhistorical processes often determine, or at least influ-ence, the economic success of Western societies. Thiskind of reasoning tends to imply an inability bypoorer countries to measure up to some standards ofexcellence based on hegemonic perceptions of therelationship between developed and underdevel-oped, between powerful and powerless, and betweenFirst and Third World people. Hobart notes that inthis way of thinking, “being underdeveloped oftenimplies, if not actually iniquity, at least stupidity,failure and sloth.” These perceived deficiencies are

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


paradoxically articulated in rhetoric of altruisticconcern for the less fortunate and then translatedinto development initiatives.

Anthropologists and other social scientists tryto understand why poverty and underdevelopmentcontinue to define life experiences and choices formost people in the world. Three main currents ofthought dominate these discussions. The dominantschool of thought, also known as modernizationtheory, stresses the deficiencies of poor countries,such as their inability to form democratic govern-ments, their low level of education, and the absence ofwell-formed civil societies as the root of their under-development. They gloss over the responsibilities ofrich countries in the perpetuation of these problemsand see Westernization as the only solution to thedisparity.

The Marxist theory of underdevelopmentproposes an analysis that highlights how mechanismsof exploitation and class struggle in Third Worldcountries work to maintain patterns of inequality.They note that, through control of capital and pro-duction, the dominant classes continue to exploit thepoor and build wealth and power.

Another school of thought, which subscribes todependency theory, suggests that the industrializedworld’s quest for increased wealth creates poverty andunderdevelopment. In this view, poverty in the ThirdWorld can only be understood within the larger con-text of the world economic system and the wealth ofcapitalist countries as dependant on the exploitationof poorer countries. This perspective is strongly sup-ported by Third World social scientists.

Development is usually equated with Westerniza-tion instead of empowerment.

Even though some point to the dependency of theThird World on wealthier countries for trade andmanufacturing jobs, others argue that dependencyalso goes the other way—that rich nations rely on thecheap labor force of Third World countries and alsoneed to sell their products in Third World markets.

Development assistance was expected to alleviatepoverty and narrow the gap between developed andunderdeveloped countries. It has worked for somecountries and for some people in places like NewZealand and Australia and some Latin Americancountries. Overall, however, the promises of develop-ment have not been fulfilled, and we see an increaseddependency of poor countries on rich countries foreconomic support and trade at the same time that the

gap between rich and poor countries is increasing.Structural adjustment measures and other fiscal poli-cies required by international financial institutions asa condition for granting assistance stymie efforts ofThird World countries to escape from the grip ofpoverty.

The interplay between development and powerrelations cannot he ignored. In Reversed Realities,Kabeer clarifies how these relationships work bysuggesting that those involved in development assis-tance should pay close attention to the dynamicsbetween “key” and “unofficial” actors. She suggeststhat abstract and highly formal modes of theorizing,which tend to silence or devalue the viewpoints ofunofficial actors in development, have helped to gen-erate top-down approaches that have become thehallmark of much of mainstream development policy.She notes that “key” actors are those in positions ofauthority and thus influence development discourseand initiatives, while “unofficial” actors, as subordi-nates, are those supposedly in need of development.

Jeffrey Sachs suggests that rich countries and inter-national institutions have the capacity and the powerto end poverty, if they really wanted to, and that it canbe done relatively cheaply. He notes that the majorityof the diseases that kill the poor such as malaria anddiarrhea are easily preventable, that the extremepoverty that has become so prevalent in most of theThird World is avoidable if the powerful were tospread resources more evenly. In a 2005 address to theWorld Bank, Sachs noted that as long as wealthynations and multinational corporations persist inselling things to people who have no money, povertywill continue and Third World debt will increase. Hechallenged the World Bank, and by extension Westerncountries and development practitioners, to step upto the plate and meet the challenge of the MillenniumDevelopment Goal to reduce global poverty in half by2015 and “be done with poverty that kills” by 2025. Tomeet these challenges, the rich would have to put theneeds of the poor ahead of increasing profits andcontrolling the powerless. It is important, however, tokeep in mind that development is a big business forwealthy nations.

Anthropology and Development

How does development happen? What is the devel-opment encounter like? Who are the various playersin this game? A look at these questions will shed lighton the complexities of “doing development” and why

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


it is difficult to measure the outcome of developmentinitiatives.

Applied anthropologists generally agree that devel-opment projects fall into two broad categories: top-down initiatives and bottom-up ones. Top-downdevelopment projects are usually designed outsidethe area of intervention. Critics of this form of devel-opment point out that such initiatives reflect Westernideas of how things should be done and offer Westernsolutions for Third World problems. They are usuallydesigned by experts associated with multilateral orga-nizations—aid organizations composed of severalmember or donor countries like the United Nations,the World Health Organization, or the World Bank.These organizations have large bureaucracies, are wellfunded, and finance projects through large grants andloans. They undertake projects with a broad scope,target problems that affect large numbers of people,and can become engaged in building infrastructures.

Like multilateral organizations, bilateral or govern-mental organizations (GOs) are also engaged in large-scale development projects. They are the internationalassistance arms of individual donor countries andhave well-defined political agendas in addition to theirhumanitarian mission. Among the largest and mostpowerful GOs are the USAID (U.S. Agency forInternational Development) and the CIDA (CanadianInternational Development Agency).

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) refers toa number of private, nonprofit organizations workingin developing countries. Contrary to larger develop-ment organizations, NGOs use a bottom-up approachto development that stresses empowerment as wellas sharing of power and responsibilities. NGOs can beinternational or grassroots organizations located inThird World countries. Local NGOs can be villagecooperatives, community-based groups, peasant orga-nizations, or women’s groups, while missionary groupsand nonprofit or volunteer organizations fall underthe label of international NGOs.

The relationship between donor/developmentorganization and recipient/local communities is com-plex. Several issues need to be addressed, such as, Whosets the agenda? What type of organization is bestsuited to undertake specific projects? Who is responsi-ble to make development “go,” foreign agencies orlocal beneficiaries? Who are the beneficiaries of devel-opment assistance? How is community defined?

Some anthropologists suggest that developmentagencies and aid workers are often too concerned

with short-term changes and lack the flexibility, thetime, and the patience to become familiar with thelocal context and to really listen to what the poorneed, and they end up designing development initia-tives that do not address the real needs or desires ofthe intended beneficiaries. These anthropologists askwhether top-down approaches and cookie cuttersolutions that are supposed to end poverty have deliv-ered on their promises. The answer is not easy to sortout. While international and bilateral organizationscan mobilize significant economic and technicalresources, they are not well suited to support long-term interventions because they are burdened bytop-heavy administrations and are too concernedwith quick results. As development practitionersknow, development that works takes time. Grassrootsorganizations, on the other hand, have the opportu-nity to develop a better understanding of local issuesand form long-term working relationships in thecommunities where they work. They are limited, how-ever, by their inability to mobilize enough resourcesand influence policymakers. It is important to keep inmind that while grassroots changes and collaborativeapproaches are critical in the struggle to alleviatepoverty, infrastructures and nation-building effortsare also necessary. Thus, each type of organizationplays a specific role in the process of development andcan complement each other. The best results areachieved when large organizations and NGOs teamup to address specific problems.

It is equally important to clarify who the intendedbeneficiaries of development projects are and have aclear idea about the area of intervention. Whileselecting a narrow focus and a small area of interven-tion may have advantages, it is also likely thatrestricting the scope of an intervention too tightlymay limit the potential for change and for replica-tion. When carefully planned, development initia-tives can play a vital role in strengthening civilsociety and can serve as catalysts in encouragingnationalism. What is needed, and most difficult toachieve, is to establish respectful and collaborativerelationships with all parties in the developmentprocess. While foreign organizations are critical play-ers in development, their role is to assist local com-munities solve their own problems.

Ideas about the meaning of economic develop-ment have changed from an emphasis on GDP andcreation of wealth to a focus on poverty and basichuman needs, that is, human development. While

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


theoretically we are moving in the right direction,the application of these notions is difficult, slow, andnot always along the lines of the ideologies. We expe-rience difficulties linking practice to theory. Often,practice is just experimentation and the stakes arehigh. Or ideologies that make sense on paper are dif-ficult to realize for a number of reasons.

Most people agree that development should be aboutimproving human potential and not WesternizingThird World countries. Investment in human devel-opment calls for a focus on quality of life and, there-fore, on improvements in education and health care,as well as on the social and political climate. Critiquesof this type of development suggest that rather thansafeguarding the interests of workers, human devel-opment could be construed as protection of theworker as a form of capital.

A variety of approaches inform the work of devel-opment practitioners and their choice of methods.Each approach reflects a particular construction ofthe relationship between donor and recipient, of theexpectations of donor organizations and their per-ceptions of recipients of development assistance.In participatory development, project managementand authority are shared between all parties. A partic-ipatory approach requires time and energy as wellas accountability, respect of local values as guidingprinciples, and privileging local expertise over for-eign ideas.

A great deal of attention is also given to sustainabledevelopment. In 1992, the World Bank outlined thesalient aspects of sustainable development such asenvironmental preservation, reduction of populationgrowth, attention to local problems, cost efficiency,and clear short-term and long-term goals. However,sustainability is often invoked to limit access to life-saving medicines and technologies. Some anthropol-ogists, like Farmer, suggest that pragmatic solidarityis a more humane way of solving poverty. Pragmaticsolidarity implies more than delivery of services; itaddresses the broader goals of equality and justice forthe poor. An example of this approach is demon-strated in the findings of the Global Anti-PovertySummit held in Haiti in 2004. Participants in thesummit concluded that in order for the extremelypoor—those who live under $1 a day—to make gooduse of microcredit programs, they need other kinds ofinfrastructure and social investment such as educa-tion, access to health care, food, and security to pre-pare them to succeed. Multilateral organizations and

financial institutions are too often reluctant to investin such programs, which they find too costly and notsustainable. Grassroots organizations are more will-ing to undertake projects that address the needs of thevery poor and to use a community developmentapproach. This approach is a holistic approach andincorporates education and training as well as eco-nomic support for grassroots projects.

The participation of anthropologists in develop-ment work has been strongly contested among thosein the discipline. Some critiques point to previousassociations of anthropologists with colonialism andwarn that development could be construed as a formof neocolonization. Others note that anthropologists’focus on culture, their research methods, and theapproaches used in the discipline do position anthro-pologists to work well in Third World societies andespecially with grassroots organizations. While acade-mic anthropologists have been reluctant to do devel-opment work—engage power structures and stepinto the arena of policymaking—applied anthropolo-gists have adapted theories and methods of their dis-cipline to solve real-life problems and to advocate forthe poor and marginalized.

— Rose-Marie Chierici

Further Readings

Escobar, A. (1995). Encountering development:The making and unmaking of the ThirdWorld. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UniversityPress.

Farmer, P. E. (2003). Pathology of power. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Isbister, J. (2003). Promises not kept. Bloomfield, CO:Kumarian Press.

Jackson, E. T., & Kassam, Yusuf (Eds.). (1998).Knowledge shared: Participatory evaluation indevelopment cooperation. West Hartford, CT:Kumarian Press.

Lewellen, T. C. (1995). Dependency and development:An introduction to the Third World. Westport, CT:Bergin & Garvey.

Lewellen, T. C. (2002). The anthropology ofglobalization: Cultural anthropology entersthe 21st century. Westport, CT: Bergin &Garvey.

Trish, S. J., & Wallace, M. B. (1994). Dilemmas ofdevelopment assistance: The what, why, and whoof foreign aid. Boulder, CO: Westview.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY OF MEN126

4 ANTHROPOLOGY OF MEN

Prior to the advent of the women’s movement,anthropological research tended to focus on men’slives, rituals, and interactions, but without articulatedawareness or remark. The majority of early anthro-pologists were men; they had more access to men’sthan to women’s lives, and gender had not yetemerged as a salient problem within anthropology.Early feminist writing within anthropology advo-cated for an anthropology of women to counteractthis imbalance, and in the beginning, the anthropol-ogy of gender was a series of representations ofwomen’s daily lives. Later, the focus shifted to one ofgendered studies (the study of women and men,transgenders, and gender-making social processes)and most recently has considered men’s identities andmasculinity as important topics in their own right.These studies define men and masculinity in a varietyof ways, as thoughts, behaviors, or traits of men;thoughts or behaviors that make men into men; andthat which is opposite of female and femininity.

The anthropology of men has started to look at theclosely connected relationships between men’s andwomen’s identities; has focused on the particularitiesof men’s daily lives; has continued to address issuessurrounding male sexuality; has looked at the con-nections between gender and society; and has raisedthe question of a possible “crisis in masculinity.”

Interconnections BetweenMen’s and Women’s Identities

The notion that gender is something that is createdand negotiated within specific social spaces is wide-spread within anthropological studies of men. Someof men’s most influential social situations arisethrough their interactions with women, and anthro-pologists now argue that gender is best understood asa relational construct, meaning that cultural under-standings of what it means to be a male or femalecannot be reached without taking the connectionsbetween men and women into account.

Anthropologists studying masculinity—MatthewGutmann’s research on men in Mexico City, AnneAllison’s work on corporate masculinity in Japan, andStanley Brandes’s study of folklore and gendered rela-tions in Spain, for example—all provide evidence thatshows that men use women as points of reference as

they develop and maintain masculine identities.Work that takes a relational view of gender, therefore,strives to show that the idea of completely separatemen’s and women’s worlds is an idealized one.

Anthropologists have broadened their research tomove beyond focusing on these connections betweenmen and women and argue that one’s social environ-ment and interactions also impact the creation ofgendered identities. This research emphasizes thatthere are ongoing negotiations present in men’s lives asmasculinity is constructed and transformed througheveryday interactions, and it is clear that there aremultiple meanings of masculinity from which mencan choose based on the social situations, relation-ships, or contexts in which they find themselves.

Focusing on the Particulars

Across cultures, all men live and interact within con-texts such as the family, household, and workplace,though the particular characteristics of these spacesvary in different cultural contexts. By focusing onthese locations, the anthropology of men has alsoexamined ideas such as men’s and women’s roles andthe division of labor and resources within the family,the effects of work outside of the home on men’s lives,and ideas about fatherhood and parenting.

The image of the male-headed household with aclearly delineated division of labor is one that manygender studies have promoted. Other research, suchas sociologist Arlie Hochschild’s The Time Bind, hasbegun to complicate and flesh out this supposedideal, however. Hoschschild writes about family lifeamong middle-class families in the United States andexamines the ways in which traditionally held viewsabout men’s and women’s roles are changing as aresult of practical demands and personal desires ofspouses in dual-career families. Anthropologist IreneCasique looks at similar questions in her studies ofworking-class Mexican families as she examineschanges in the division of labor within families wherewomen work outside of the home, noting that men’sparticipation in housework continues to be ratherlow and sporadic.

Many anthropologists have also focused on theways in which work itself—male and female, paid andunpaid, inside and outside of the home—impactsmen’s relationships with their wives, families, andother men in the community. With the powerful eco-nomic changes that started in the 1980s, studies such

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY OF MEN 127

as Elizabeth Brusco’s The Reformation of Machismo:Evangelical Conversion and Gender in Colombia havehighlighted the ways in which economic trans-formations and gendered relations are intertwined,and the connections between financial situations,social change, and how an increasing number ofmulti- and transnational employment opportunitiesaffect men’s lives.

With changes in ideas about men’s and women’swork, as well as in the types and availability ofemployment, come shifts in men’s responsibilities,and studies have looked at the ways in which parent-ing and fatherhood play into the negotiation of mas-culine roles and responsibilities. For example, JoséOlavarría examines the deep transitions regardingnotions of fatherhood in nuclear, working-classfamilies in Chile, arguing that a hegemonic masculin-ity and patriarchal fatherhood still serve as referencepoints for fathers, but that the growing autonomy ofwomen, changes in economy, and the requirements ofa nuclear family create new demands and dilemmasfor men that make it difficult to fit the standards ofwhat he calls “modern fatherhood.”

Men and Sexuality

A third focus within the anthropology of men is theconnection between men and sexuality. In this con-text, sexuality can refer to the wide range of sexualpractices, beliefs, and taboos, as well as the culturalvalues and meanings assigned to men’s sexuality.

The importance of heterosexuality as a means ofshowing men’s power and control (either over womenor among one’s peers) has been extensively docu-mented. Part of Phillipe Bourgois’s argument in InSearch of Respect is that serial monogamy and blatantheterosexuality are ways in which the extremely poor,disenfranchised men in New York City with whom heworks feel like they can exert dominance over others.In many studies of men in Latin America and theMediterranean, the concept of machismo is alsodirectly related to heterosexual practices and is a wayin which men assert authority and control.

Works that focus on sexuality and eroticismbetween men have also been central to studies ofmen and masculinity. For instance, Gilbert Herdt’sGuardians of the Flutes and Ritualized Homosexualityin Melanasia were two of the earliest works thatfocused on men’s sexual practices as core to theethnography, and examined how male youth in

certain New Guinea societies engage in fellatio(generally, older youths inseminate or feed semento younger youths) as a central and even necessarypart of becoming masculine and adult. Other ethno-graphic studies on groups such as the “two-spiritedones” in Plains Indian societies; Lynn Stephen’s workon “third gender” roles in Oaxaca, Mexico; AnnickPrieur’s Mema’s House: On Transvestites, Queens, andMachos, about male transvestites in Mexico City; aswell as Don Kulick’s Travesti: Sex, Gender, and Cultureamong Brazilian Transgendered Prostitutes have allexamined men’s involvement in what their communi-ties view as alternative sexualities and the complicatedways that masculinity can be challenged, trans-formed, and/or reaffirmed through same-sex sexualpractices.

For example, the work of both Prieur and Kulickfocuses on biologically defined men who in complexand varied ways strive to become socially definedwomen. In Prieur’s work, the vestidos do not conteststereotypical gendered roles, but instead attempt to fitinto them as closely as possible. They dress as women,get plastic surgery, inject their bodies with oil to cre-ate “womanly” curves, and prefer to take a passive rolein sex. In Kulick’s ethnography, however, though thetravestis fit into many female-gendered roles, theyalso embrace their maleness and are disgusted by bio-logical women. These are just two among a number ofdiverse ethnographic studies that reveal the variedways in which masculine and transgendered identitiesare created through bodily appearance (such as dress,hormones, oil injections), anatomy, sexual practices(active versus passive roles), as well as social inter-actions and behaviors.

Gender and Society

Images of masculinity have also proved powerful athigher levels of sociocultural integration, such as thenation. In many cases, the nation itself is conceptual-ized as female, while national protagonists and idealcitizens are masculinized, and threats to the nationare seen both as acts that violate the national (female)body and appropriate forms of masculinity. Theseprocesses, of course, take diverse local forms.

Octavio Paz explicitly connects gender to theMexican nation in The Labyrinth of Solitude: Life andThought in Mexico, where he discusses the ideas ofthe “macho” Mexican man and Spanish colonization.The conquistadors, he argues, violated the “passive”

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY OF RELIGION128

Mexican (female) nation through colonization, justas masculine “macho” Mexican men physically, sexu-ally, and emotionally abuse weaker men and women.Eduardo Archetti also discusses the connectionsbetween masculinity and the nation. He describes theways in which Argentinian (male) soccer playersdeveloped a different style of play from that of theBritish colonizers—a style of play that ultimatelystood for both a model soccer player and an ideal,implicitly masculine, Argentine citizen who symbol-ized that which was opposite of the colonizer, as wellas a faithful representation of the nation.

A Crisis in Masculinity?

Finally, following David Gilmore’s Manhood in theMaking, some anthropologists have argued thatmen are culturally “made” and therefore have toachieve masculinity through complex processes.These processes, including insemination rites andgroup circumcision, as well as individual achieve-ments such as finding employment, marrying, andhaving children, allow boys to be seen as men bytheir communities. This becomes more difficultwhen there are significant changes in men’s lives,leading to what some of the most recent genderedanalyses of men label as a “crisis” in masculinity.These works use social factors such as decliningeconomies, an increase in the percentage of womenworking outside of the home, a greater equality inthe salaries of men and women, and an increase ineducation for women to provide background expla-nation for this “crisis” and the inability of men toachieve the socially acceptable and “appropriate”forms of masculinity and/or manliness.

The Importance of Men inFuture Anthropological Research

The study of men in anthropology holds a compli-cated position. Whereas men were once the defaultfocus of anthropological research and writing, gen-dered studies on the particularities of men’s lives andmasculinity have been overshadowed until recentlyby a focus on women’s lives and femininity. As aresult, the anthropology of men continues to be a keytopic to explore further—especially taking intoaccount the effects of factors such as globalizationand migration, and the connected and dramaticallyshifting economic opportunities, social resources,

and family relationships as men construct andnegotiate their gendered identities.

— Sara Withers

See also Anthropology of Women; Gender; Sex Roles

Further Readings

Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Berkeley:University of California Press.

Cornwall, A., & Lindisfarne, N. (1994). Dislocatingmasculinity: Comparative ethnographies. London:Routledge.

Gutmann, M. (1997). Trafficking in men: Theanthropology of masculinity. Annual Review ofAnthropology, 26, 385–409.

Gutmann, M. (Ed.). (2003). Changing men andmasculinities in Latin America. Durham, NC: DukeUniversity Press.

Kimmel, M., & Messner, M. (1998). Men’s lives.London: Allyn & Bacon.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY OF RELIGION

Anthropological studies of religion had their begin-nings in the late 19th century, with the seminal worksof Max Muller, W. Robertson Smith, Edward B. Tylor,and James G. Frazer. These scholars, of course, werenot the first to take an interest in the comparativestudy of religion, nor were they the first to speculateon the religions of preliterate and tribal peoples.What set these men apart is that they were among thefirst to suggest that tribal religions might be amenableto study following the rules of the scientific methodand to posit specific methodological procedures forthe comparative analysis of religious beliefs and prac-tices. All four of these scholars have been character-ized as “armchair theorists” and dilettantes (althoughMuller was an expert in Sanskrit; Robertson Smithhad an excellent command of Semitic languages;Tylor had spent time studying the antiquities ofMexico; and Frazer had a strong background in clas-sics). All four scholars conducted their research fromthe apex of a far-flung British Empire and therebyhad access to a wider range of comparative data thanhad been available previously.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY OF RELIGION 129

Muller, Robertson Smith, Tylor, and Frazer formu-lated theories that have been characterized as “intel-lectualistic.” All four of these men were primarilyinterested in human thought. All sought to under-stand religious belief and practice at its most funda-mental, elementary level. Frazer argued, for example,that human thought is best understood as a progres-sion from magic, to religion, to science. Magic—which Frazer contended was based either on theprinciple of contagion or “sympathy” (the idea thatif two objects are associated, they will continue toinfluence one another even after they are separated),or the notion of imitation (that idea that like influ-ences like)—was said to be the earliest form. In moreadvanced societies, Frazer contended, magic eventu-ally is replaced by religion and finally by science.

Nineteenth-century anthropologists—as was com-mon among social scientists of their day—derivedtheir assumptions about religion from their own expe-riences within the Christian tradition. While Mullerand Frazer considered themselves agnostics, Tylor andRobertson Smith were devout Christians. Anothersource of bias is that “armchair anthropologists” likeTylor and Frazer tested their theories on the basis ofthe highly suspect reports provided by missionariesand European travelers. It was the rare Westernobserver who was able to report on non-Western reli-gions objectively. Indeed, evolutionary models currentat the time would have precluded such objectivereportage. Given these substantial constraints, it isamazing that the 19th-century interpretations of tribalreligions are as sympathetic and insightful as theysometimes are. Despite their evolutionary assumptionsand their overwhelming Eurocentric and Judeo-Christian biases, Muller, Robertson Smith, Tylor, andFrazer ended up making valuable contributions to thestudy of religion and can profitably be read today.

It is not surprising that many of the leading mindsof the 19th century would turn their attention to reli-gion. It has never been difficult to make a case for thesignificance of religion in human life. Religion hasbeen found in all societies studied by anthropologists.It is highly visible and in the words of Raymond T.Firth (1995) represents “a massive output of humanenterprise.” Religious beliefs and practices are anenduring tribute to humankind’s nearly infiniteresourcefulness and adaptability in coping with theproblems of daily life. As William W. Howells (1948)astutely noted, “Man’s life is hard, very hard. And heknows it, poor soul; that is the thing. He knows that

he is forever confronted with the Four Horsemen—death, famine, disease, and the malice of other men.”

Despite a keen and enduring interest in religion,there is no single, uniform anthropological theory ofreligion or a common methodology for the study ofreligious beliefs and practices. Researchers in the areacannot agree as to how exactly “religion” should bedefined or what the term “religion” should encom-pass. Efforts at defining religion—ranging fromEdward B. Tylor’s 1871 definition of religion as “thebelief in spirit beings” to the more complex defini-tions offered by Clifford Geertz and Melford Spirto—have met with considerable resistance. Nevertheless,Geertz’s (1973) definition was far and away the mostinfluential anthropological definition of religion formuch of the 20th century: “(1) a system of symbolswhich acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, andlong-lasting moods and motivations in men (andwomen) by (3) formulating conceptions of a generalorder of existence and (4) clothing these conceptionswith such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods andmotivations seem uniquely realistic.”

While his definition may be useful in elaboratingwhat religion is like conceptually and what it doespsychologically and socially, Geertz has been criti-cized for failing to inform the budding researcherhow he or she might identify religion when encoun-tered in the field. A major stumbling block to all defi-nitions of religion, of course, is that religion is not a“thing,” but an abstraction.

Other 20th-century definitions of religion (forexample, Melford E. Spiro and E. E. Evans-Pritchard)followed Emile Durkheim in positing a dichotomybetween the so-called “supernatural” and “natural”orders. These alternative definitions have proved nomore satisfactory than Geertz’s, since distinctionsbetween “supernatural” and “natural” are seldomobvious and may vary from individual to individualand from society to society.

In the early 21st century, debate has arisen con-cerning the scope of anthropology of religion. Doanthropologists of religion study religions only intribal settings? Is it exclusively the study of non-Western religions? Is it to be limited to the study ofreligion among oppressed and marginalized people?The focus of anthropological study has shifted fromthe study of tribal to modern religions. A number ofwell-received studies have analyzed religion in devel-oping societies, Europe, and in the United States.Many of the leading contemporary exponents of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY OF RELIGION130

anthropology of religion—John R. Bowen, Thomas J.Csordas, Tonya Luhrmann, Robert Hefner, MauriceBloch, Jonathan Friedman, Vincent Crapanzano,Edith L. B. Turner, James W. Fernandez, Sherry B.Ortner, Mary Douglas, Jean Comaroff, Benson Saler,and Stanley J. Tambiah—have devoted the bulk oftheir attention to local variants of major world reli-gions (Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism, and Christianity)and/or the impact of world religions in developingcountries (Java, Indonesia, Morocco, Sri Lanka, SouthAfrica, and Nepal) rather than the religions of iso-lated tribal groups. Contemporary ethnographersconcentrate on examining religious diversity in com-plex societies instead of providing further documen-tation for uniformity in tribal religions.

An unresolved issue facing anthropology of reli-gion is the nature and problem of religious beliefitself. “Belief ” (and conversion) is central withinProtestant Christianity, but is clearly of less concernin tribal religions, where questions of orthodoxyseldom arise. There has been protracted debateamong scholars as to whether it’s possible for a non-believer to make definitive pronouncements concern-ing the religious beliefs of others. Can a religion beunderstood only from the perspective of a believer?While a number of leading psychologists and sociolo-gists of religion are themselves adherents to thefaiths they study, the overwhelming majority ofanthropologists are skeptics. Most anthropologicalstudies reduce religion to human terms, and manyanthropologists would agree with Raymond Firth(1995), who concluded, “There is truth in every reli-gion. But it is a human not a divine truth.”

Belief presents special problems for anthropolo-gists because conversion is seldom a viable option foroutsiders studying tribal religions. Nevertheless, anumber of anthropologists have insisted that reli-gions can be grasped only from “within.” This is espe-cially true for ethnographers who conduct researchamong Pentecostals and Fundamentalists and themany contemporary anthropologists who specializein new religious movements, such as neoshamanismand Wicca. In the last four decades, anthropologistshave grappled with the dialectical relationshipbetween the examination of cultures from the emic,or insider, perspective, or from the etic, or outsider,perspective. Nowhere is this creative tension moreevident than in the anthropological study of reli-gion. Questions of theory and method that can beaddressed provisionally, hypothetically, or heuristically

in other social or cultural arenas become fundamentaland often impossible to ignore in the study ofreligion. While distinctions of belief versus nonbeliefor inner versus outer realities may be bracketedand examined heuristically, the very nature of thatheuristic—the discovery process itself—needs to becarefully defined and pursued.

The hallmark of 20th-century anthropology hasbeen the advocacy of firsthand participant observa-tion and/or fieldwork. This altered once-and-for-allthe character and scope of research on religion andforced anthropologists to become more modest intheir goals and less sweeping in their generalizations.Contemporary anthropological assertions are morelikely to concern the manifestation of a particularbelief in a particular place and time rather than spec-ulate on “religion” in the abstract. Researchers focuson a single aspect of a religion (a specific myth, aspecific ritual, or an aspect of a ritual such as divina-tion, sacrifice, spirit possession, and so on) but refuseto examine an entire religious complex. This has hadboth positive and negative consequences for theanthropological study of religion. Twentieth-centuryanthropologists of religion have been left with thechoice of “saying more with less authority” or “sayingless with more authority.” Most have chosen the latterpath. This is a far cry from the imperial stance taken byMuller, Tylor, Robertson Smith, and Frazer and cannothelp but have far-reaching consequences for theanthropological study of religion in the next century.

Theories developed in other subfields of anthro-pology (linguistics, economics, kinship, ecology) havebeen applied—with varying degrees of success—tothe anthropological study of religion. As a result, reli-gions have been analyzed from a variety of perspec-tives: functional, psychological, ecological, structural,cross-cultural, cognitive, and symbolic. Of these newperspectives, variants of functionalism have been themost enduring. But cognitive and symbolic studiesare likely to dominate in the next century.

A number of promising studies have focused onritual and ritual practice. From this perspective, ritu-als are seen as the fundamental unit of religiousexpression and the building blocks for all religions.Earlier studies underscore the role of ritual in mirror-ing defining central features of society and culture,worldviews, identities, political forms, and socialarrangements. More recently, scholars have arguedthat ritual not only mirrors these defining features,but challenges them as well. Greater attention has

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY OF RELIGION 131

been given to so-called ritual inversions and whatMax Gluckman has termed “rituals of rebellion.”

In the 19th century, scholars like Lady Jane Harrisonargued valiantly for the primacy of ritual over myth.All mythology, they argued, has its roots in ritual activ-ity. The myth-ritual debate raged for over 60 years,until 1942, when Clyde Kluckhohn offered a satisfac-tory compromise by recounting multiple instances inwhich a myth clearly began as a ritual and otherinstances in which a ritual clearly began as a myth.

Anthropological studies of ritual distinguishbetween calendrical and crisis rituals and betweenindividual and collective rites. For Durkheim, ritualsboth reflect and support the moral framework under-lying social arrangements. Radcliffe-Brown improvedon Durkheim’s theory by attempting to explain whysome rituals are chosen over others. Ultimately,Radcliffe-Brown suggested, rituals directly related tothe collective and material well-being of a society areelevated to having spiritual “ritual value” as well.

Perhaps the most influential 19th-century study ofritual was provided by Arnold van Gennep in The Ritesof Passage (1909/1960). Van Gennep argued for the sig-nificance of rites of transition, which he categorized asan immutable tripartite sequence: separation, liminal-ity, and reaggregation. Victor Turner’s The RitualProcess (1969) advanced van Gennep’s concept of “lim-inality” by advocating its applicability for the study ofritual in both tribal (Ndembu) and modern Europeansocieties. Roy A. Rappaport’s Pigs for the Ancestors(1968) adroitly demonstrated how rituals regulateenvironmental relations. Rappaport’s is one of thebest-known studies linking religious ritual and ecology.

Within the anthropological tradition, myth hasbeen understood primarily as an encapsulation ofsacred truth. Functional theorists like BronislawMalinowski have argued that myth promotes socialcohesion and serves as a “charter” for human behav-ior. Myth, in short, legitimates human activities.Other theorists have treated mythology as separatefrom religion. The 20th-century study of mythologyhas received its greatest proponent in the seminalwork of the French structural anthropologist ClaudeLevi-Strauss, who finds in myth a key to the underly-ing structures of the human mind. Myth, for Levi-Strauss, reveals how the mind functions.

Anthropologists have long noted that religionsare highly dynamic, and the role of religion in fosteringsocial change has been extensively explored. An interestin religious change is discernable in the evolutionary

theories of Tylor and Frazer as well as the 20th-century diffusionist studies of Leslie Spier andAlfred L. Kroeber. Anthony F. C. Wallace identified afive-stage progression to account for attitudinal andorganizational changes that occur within religiousmovements: prophetic, utopian, messianic, millennial,or millenarian. Wallace is best known for his concep-tion of “revitalization movements” and his applica-tion of this concept to the Plains Indian Ghost Danceand cargo cults in Melanesia.

Much recent work in anthropology of religionfocuses on symbols and cognition as exemplified inthe writings of Clifford Geertz, Victor Turner, EdithL. B. Turner, James W. Fernandez, James Boon, SherryB. Ortner, Mary Douglas, and others. Still otherapproaches focus on biological and experiential modelsof religion. Cognitive and neurological sciences haveproduced great insights into the biology of behavior,

Source: © iStockphoto/David Freund.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

THE ANTHROPOLO GY OF WOMEN132

and many of these insights have been extended to thestudy of religion. Organizations like the Society forthe Anthropology of Religion and the Society forthe Anthropology of Consciousness (both establishedsections of the American Anthropological Associa-tion) are devoted to the rigorous, scientific explo-ration of religious experiences, including the religioususe of hallucinogens, categorization of altered statesof consciousness, shamanism, trance states, and thecross-cultural study of spirit possession. Naturalistictheories of religion have experienced a revival in thewritings of Stewart Elliott Guthrie and Pascal Boyer.In addition, a number of anthropology graduate pro-grams have expanded their offerings in anthropologyof religion, notably, the University of Chicago and theUniversity of California-San Diego.

Other scholars have devoted attention to thereassessment of previous research. They have arguedthat contemporary anthropologists of religion are con-strained by inadequate and outmoded categories andconceptions. Their frustration is eloquently expressedby Morton Klass (1995), who laments that anthropolo-gists of religion continue to embrace “theoretical per-ceptions and assumptions that have long since beenjettisoned in most other areas of anthropological con-cern and activity.” Not all anthropologists would agree.Such critical assessments often fail to do justice tothe tremendous amount that can be learned from theexcellent earlier textbooks of Robert Lowie, EdwardNorbeck, Anthony F. C. Wallace, Paul Radin, andAnnemarie de Waal Malefijt as well as the recent textsby Fiona Bowie, John R. Bowen, and Stephen D. Glazier.

In conclusion, functional, cognitive, and symbolicapproaches have dominated the anthropological studyof religion in the late 20th century as researchers havebecome increasingly concerned with the concept ofmeaning. Doubtless, biological, neurological, andcognitive approaches will assume greater importancein the next century. Anthropology of religion is nolonger focused on the study of religion in tribalsocieties. Since the late 1970s, a majority of anthropo-logical studies have dealt with religion in the devel-oped or developing world.

— Stephen D. Glazier

Portions of this entry have been adapted from The Encyclo-pedia of Religion and Society, edited by W. Swatos, Alta MiraPress.

See also Religion and Anthropology; Religious Rituals

Further Readings

Bowen, J. R. (2004). Religion in practice: An approachto the anthropology of religion (2nd ed.). Needham,MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Bowie, F. (2000). The anthropology of religion. Oxford:Blackwell.

Buckser, A., & Glazier, S. D. (Eds.). (2003). Theanthropology of religious conversion. Lanham, MD:Rowman & Littlefield.

Firth, R. T. (1995). Religion: A humanist approach.New York: Routledge.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of culture.New York: Basic Books.

Glazier, S. D. (2005). Anthropology of religion: A shortintroduction. Oxford: One World.

Glazier, S. D., & Flowerday, C. A. (2003). Selectedreadings in the anthropology of religion: Theoreticaland methodological essays. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Howells, W. W. (1948). The heathens: Primitive manand his religion. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.(Reprinted by Sheffield Publishing)

Klass, M. (1995). Ordered universes: Approaches to theanthropology of religion. Boulder, CO: WestviewPress.

4 THE ANTHROPOLOGY OF WOMEN

There are two ways to interpret “the anthropology ofwomen:” One is as the work of women anthropolo-gists, and the other is as anthropology that focuses onwomen as its subject. This entry deals with the latter,although for many reasons, the two often go hand inhand. Feminist anthropology, the ethnography ofwomen, and female anthropologists have all beenhistorically associated together, as it was feministanthropologists—most of them women—who werefirst interested in doing fieldwork with women,writing ethnography about women, researchinganthropological questions about women, and writingtheory about women and gender.

Many early ethnographies are notable for a distinctlack of women. Early male (and some female) ethnog-raphers, speaking mostly or entirely to male infor-mants, managed to create many ethnographic accountsthat seemed to be entirely about men. A chapter insuch an ethnography might be devoted to marriageand children (in which women would naturally figure

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

THE ANTHROPOLO GY OF WOMEN 133

as indispensable to these activities), but women werelargely absent from early depictions of traditional life.Likewise, gender and women’s concerns were alsolargely absent from early theory. As women enteredthe field of anthropology—quite early—many ofthem noticed this oversight and began to take steps toamend it.

We can characterize the anthropology of women asfalling into four categories so far: the study of womenin relation to men and gender roles (“women andmen”); large-scale cross-cultural theorizing about theposition of women globally (“woman, culture, andsociety”); the study of women’s activities as valuablein and of themselves (“filling the gap” left by prioranthropologists); and last, the more modern view ofpositioning studies of women within a framework ofgender and other cultural forces, often foregroundingagency and practice (“positioned studies”—becauseof the different theories and views the anthropologistmay bring to bear). While these categories follow aroughly chronological order in their development,they do not follow a chronological order in their use;for example, many anthropologists still do genderrole studies today (as indeed we should, as our under-standing of gender is very different now than it was70 years ago).

Sex and Temperament, Women and Men

Margaret Mead, arguably one of the most famousearly anthropologists, focused much of her work notonly on women in society, but on questions of genderand gender roles. Her most famous work, Coming ofAge in Samoa: A Psychological Study of Primitive Youthfor Western Civilisation (1928), examines the lives ofteenaged girls, a population mostly ignored by previ-ous anthropologists. Much of her work focused ongender and the relations between men and women,and this focus meant that researchers and readers ofher popular works alike were aware as never before ofwomen as a worthy subject of study.

Mead’s famous Sex and Temperament in ThreePrimitive Societies (1935) first raised the question ofwhether gender roles as they were conceived byWestern culture were biological and thus unchange-able, or whether they were cultural and societal. Inexploring three cultures in Papua New Guinea withdistinctly different gender roles, Mead revealed that inthe Arapesh culture, both sexes behaved in ways char-acterized by Western cultures as “feminine”; among

the Mundugumor, both sexes behaved in aggressiveways that would be characterized in Western culturesas “masculine”; and the Tchambuli had gender rolesthat could be construed as reversed by Western stan-dards. While the use of terms such as “masculine” and“feminine” was arguably problematic (as the genderroles were perfectly normal for men and women inthose societies), the point that gender roles differ to agreat extent across cultures was made very effectively.Mead was thus able to argue that gender roles wereformed by culture rather than biology and were notonly variable between cultures, but also possiblychangeable over time. This study—and her elabora-tion on this theme, her book Male and Female: AStudy of the Sexes in a Changing World (1949)—isoften credited with inspiring anthropologists to paymore attention to women, gender roles, and the rela-tions between men and women in the field.

What Do We Know About Women?

In 1974, the Woman, Culture, and Society collectionwas published by Michelle Zimbalist Rosaldo andLouise Lamphere, in response to a series of lecturesat Stanford called “Women in Cross-Cultural Pers-pective.” The collection was groundbreaking in that itaddressed women as subjects for ethnographic studyoutside the usual bounds of marriage and child rear-ing and it served as a forum for cross-cultural theory.Sherry Ortner remarked in her later publicationMaking Gender: The Politics and Erotics of Culture(1996) that she protested that she didn’t know any-thing about women when she was recruited to writean essay for the collection in 1971 but was told thatno one else did either—it was an experimental publi-cation, an exploration into unknown territory, thepresentation of entirely new theories and new ethno-graphic material. It included essays on women in pol-itics, women and language, women and family, andthe myth of matriarchy, among other rich subjects.

While all the essays published in Woman, Culture,and Society are worthy of note, two in particular areoften referenced today. These are Ortner’s “Is Femaleto Male as Nature is to Culture” (first published inFeminist Studies) and Rosaldo’s “Woman, Culture, andSociety: A Theoretical Overview,” both of which pro-pose particular theories about gender roles. The subjectwas typical of the era: Why is male dominance uni-versal? It is notable that theorists of the time assumedthat male dominance was universal (something that

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


gender theorists no longer completely agree on; forone thing, the definition of dominance is much morecomplex, as we will explore below) and furthermorethat they were interested in looking at the cultural(rather than at biological) reasons for this cross-cultural trend. We can see Mead’s legacy here—ifgender roles are cultural, then gender inequity iscultural as well.

Ortner’s essay analyzes gender inequity in terms ofcultural associations. She asserts that most culturesassociate women with nature because of uncontrollablebiological forces, such as menstruation and child-birth, and their association with unsocialized, “nat-ural” infants and children. Men, she argues, are moreassociated with culture because their freedom fromreproductive duties allows them more time for culturalactivities. Furthermore, in most if not all cultures,culture is more highly valued than nature, becauseculture tames, “cooks” (to borrow from Levi-Strauss),and civilizes raw nature into human culture. Therefore,because of these associations, women are less valued,their activities are less valued (even when these activ-ities involve acculturating raw human infants intocivilized human beings), and they accrue less status.Ortner argues that these symbolic values are culturaland therefore changeable and that women are equallycultural (human) as men and therefore not in reality“closer to nature.”

Rosaldo’s essay takes a different approach. Althoughshe also links women’s assumed lower position vis-à-vis men across cultures with female reproductiveduties, she instead looks at the division between thedomestic and the public. She argues that because ofchild rearing, women have been historically associ-ated with the domestic in all societies and that thedomestic sphere tends to be less valued than thepublic sphere, where men predominate. This analysislooks less at symbolic associations (as Ortner’s essaydoes) and more at economic opportunities, althoughthe relative values of the domestic and the publicspheres are symbolic as well. Rosaldo argues, as Ortnerdoes, that the values associated with the public anddomestic spheres are arbitrary, as is the relative dom-inance of men in the public sphere and women in thedomestic.

The Toward an Anthropology of Women collectionin 1975 represents another milestone in the anthro-pology of women. This collection notes a strong biasin the field of anthropology of the time to assume asimplistic, direct correlation between biology and

gender roles, and it calls for more direct fieldwork, asthe wide range of gender roles already suggested acultural origin for them. The introduction (by RaynaR. Reiter) also notes that anthropology tends to have adouble male bias, as it is written from a male acade-mic perspective and is often (although not always)done in male-dominant societies. And last, Reiterproblematizes the term dominance, noting that we donot have a singular definition for what we mean by itand that the people on either side of the “dominant”relationship may have different interpretations of it.

The essays included in the collection range frommany detailed ethnographic accounts about womenin different settings—including the Kalahari, PapuaNew Guinea, the Iroquois nation, the South of France,a Spanish village, Italy, the Dominican Republic, ruralColombia, Niger, and rural China—but also manytheoretical essays, covering subjects that range fromthe much-debated matriarchy, to forager society, tothe origin of the family. It also contains the first print-ing of Gayle Rubin’s much-cited essay on “The Trafficin Women: Notes on the ‘Political Economy’ of Sex.”

Rubin introduces the concept of the “sex/gendersystem” into the theoretical discussions about womenand society. She suggests that previous theories fallshort of the mark in explaining why women arecross-culturally oppressed. (Like the previous theo-rists discussed in this section, she assumes globalmale dominance.) However, she proposes that thesetheories can be used to build a picture of currentcross-cultural forces creating gender inequities.

The theories Rubin analyzes include Marxisttheory, which she points out does not explain whywomen are oppressed in noncapitalist societies, andLevi-Strauss’s idea of the “exchange of women,” whichshe sees as a confusion of the actual complex systemof rights, social relationships, and statuses (one inwhich women do not have the same rights as men).Furthermore, she notes, the exchange of women ispredicated on the family and the sexual division oflabor (another analysis by Levi-Strauss), and thisarrangement therefore is predicated on the construc-tion of gender, sex, and obligatory heterosexuality—all constructed by culture. Rubin then turns to Freudand Lacan, postulating a “phallic culture” in whichwomen are exchanged (in kinship structures) forphallic symbols, and moreover asserting that Freud’sanalysis of feminine psychological development is anaccurate picture of how this phallic culture domesti-cates and dominates women. She sees Levi-Strauss’s

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


analysis of kinship and Freud’s analysis of the devel-opment of gender as fitting into one another like thepieces of a puzzle: Kinship depends on clearly definedsex roles, which depend on clearly defined genders,which develop out of familial structures that dependon kinship. This structure, she states clearly, is alldependent on removing rights, sexual pleasure, andopportunities from women. Furthermore, if onereintroduces Marx, one can see that the “exchange”of women in kinship structures has profound impli-cations for economy, religion, and symbolic struc-tures—it impacts many other aspects of social life.Therefore, it is not really possible to understand aculture without understanding the role and positionof women in that culture.

Rubin concludes by noting that the sex/gendersystem, which is what she calls the interlocking leavesof the “traffic in women,” is dependent on both halvesof the system, the kinship and the sexual. If the sexualdivision of labor were not observed (if men as wellas women cared for children), if heterosexuality werenot compulsory, and if there were no “exchange ofwomen,” this system, which has already been strippedto its bones, sex/gender, in Western society, wouldbreak down. She calls for the elimination of thesex/gender system altogether, a system she feels isoppressive to both genders in that it prescribesextremely narrow roles.

All of these essays—and many more written dur-ing this era—represent the anthropological trend atthe time toward “big-picture thinking:” attemptstoward constructing cross-cultural explanations fortrends and theorizing about human beings as a whole.The construction of male dominance as a globalproblem is also typical of Western feminist thinkingof the 1970s. The topics of the essays were fueled bythe second wave of feminism; indeed, it could beargued that this interest in the position of women andwomen themselves cross-culturally would not haveemerged without feminism. These essays, however,present theories that are still used today as ways toexplain why there is a trend toward male dominance(although one must be careful how one defines it) inmany cultures across the globe.

Filling a Gap: Writing About the Unwritten

In addition to theoretical essays, the anthropology ofwomen has also been concerned—and is still con-cerned—with simply writing ethnography about

women. The peculiar absence of women in earlyethnographies means that there is much yet to belearned about women’s lives across the globe. Andgiven that there are many more cultures than thereare anthropologists, there is still much more tolearn about women in many societies. “Filling thegap”—producing and exploring ethnographies aboutwomen—is done in many ways and for differentreasons. Filling the gap may involve simply filling agaping hole in ethnographic knowledge; trying toexplore issues in Western culture; dealing with a sex-segregated society; dealing with a sex-segregatedaspect of culture that impacts society; or remedyinginattention to women’s involvement in importantcultural matters.

It is interesting that ethnography about women actu-ally began early on in the history of anthropology—well before the second wave of feminism provokedglobal theorizing about women cross-culturally.However, feminism increased awareness and interestin women’s lives and many more ethnographiesfocused on women began to be published in the1970s. All the same, ethnographies on women do existprior to the explosion of theory in the 1970s. Twoexcellent examples are Ruth Landes’s The OjibwaWoman (1938) and Ruth Underhill’s Papago Woman(first published as The Autobiography of a PapagoWoman, Memoirs of the American AnthropologicalAssociation No. 46, 1934). Both of these are biogra-phies, or autobiographies, if you will, stories told tothe (woman) ethnographer by the women involved.

Underhill’s Papago Woman recounts the life of awoman of the Papago people, Native Americansliving in the Arizona area. Underhill’s interviewstook place late in her informant’s life and cover manyaspects of Papago life as well as Maria Choma’s owncomplex life story. Landes’s The Ojibwa Woman, incontrast, presents the stories of a single woman,which are not about herself, but about other womenof the tribe. Both ethnographies, as well as otherspublished during this time, are intended to recordinformation about the women of these peoples, whohave been largely ignored in other ethnographies orconventional accounts.

This interesting trend of “biographical ethnogra-phy,” established so early in the anthropology ofwomen, continues to the present day. Although thefocuses of such biographies of women change, ethno-graphies of particular women have always been a dis-tinguishing feature of the anthropology of women.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


The classic example of such an ethnography isMarjorie Shostak’s Nisa: The Life and Words of a !KungWoman (1981).

Shostak’s ethnography is not only Nisa’s life story;Shostak also provides chapter introductions that areintended to produce a larger ethnographic explana-tion of !Kung life. The ethnography is also intended,as Shostak explains in the introduction, not only tointroduce the reader to a largely gender-egalitarianway of life but also to answer questions about Westernculture and gender roles as well. The use of Nisa’s lifestory in this way is a particular style of ethnographythat owes much to the “big-picture” questions dis-cussed in the previous section: Is male dominanceuniversal? Shostak asks. What can Nisa’s life tell usabout our own society? (Later styles of biographicalethnography focus on very different things, as weshall see below.)

Not all ethnographies of women focus on particu-lar women, of course. Elizabeth Warnock Fernea,originally a journalist, produced a series of remark-able ethnographies of women in the Middle Eastwhile traveling there with her anthropologisthusband. Her Guests of the Sheik: An Ethnography ofAn Iraqi Village (1965), an account of living with Iraqiwomen in an isolated village, is an excellent ethnogra-phy of a group her husband could not possibly havehad access to—the women in a highly sex-segregatedsociety. Although cases like Fernea’s are rarer today(we like to think that most anthropologists enter thefield on their own account), the fact is that femaleanthropologists are more able to access female infor-mants in many contexts, especially sex-segregatedones. Access to women in sex-segregated societies isone argument for using female anthropologists to fillthe gap of information on these societies.

Another example of female access on the part ofthe anthropologist is Diane Bell’s Daughters of theDreaming (1993), an exploration of aboriginalwomen’s ritual activity and religion at Warrabiri inCentral Australia. While the people she worked withwere not a sex-segregated society—far from it—hersubject was a sex-segregated one, as magic, religion,and ritual often require sex segregation in this cul-ture. Her ethnography covers the entire communityof men and women, with a particular focus on thesubject of women’s ritual, religion, and magic andhow it influences the community and the impact ithas on gender and people’s lives. Bell produced animportant ethnography, for while we know a great

deal about men’s ritual, we know much less about theritual of women and how it is intertwined into thelives of people in general.

Last, Annette Weiner’s Women of Value, Men ofRenown: New Perspectives in Trobriand Exchange(1976) should be mentioned as a final example.Published in the same era as Woman, Culture, andSociety and Toward an Anthropology of Women, thisvolume represents an ambitious attempt to refigureexchange and value in the Trobriand Islands, the samearea where Malinowski did his fieldwork. Focusing onexchange between women as well as the exchangebetween men made so famous by Malinowski, Wienersuggests that there are entire dimensions of Trobriandvalue and exchange that we simply did not knowabout, because women and their work and exchangesystems were previously omitted from the analysis.Her version of filling the gap suggests that omittingwomen from the picture in the first place may haveresulted in an inaccurate portrait of Trobriandexchange.

Positioning Ourselves: WritingAbout Women, Writing About Theory

Current work in the anthropology of women isextremely diverse. Although Kamala Visweswaransuggests in her “Histories of Feminist Ethnography”(1996) that the problematization of “woman” as abiological (and therefore universal) category has tosome extent scattered work in the field, the anthro-pology of women is still very active, though it varieswidely. This question, among others, has complicatedthe issue of doing fieldwork among women: How dowe define women if anthropologists view sex as asocial rather than as a purely biological category?That is, since we cannot experience our biology savethrough the lens of our culture, biology has culturalmeaning. Given that cultural meanings can vary, isthere really a single category of people called women?

How do we locate women in the web of race, eth-nicity, sexuality, class, nation, and other relationships?What about the relationship of power between theanthropologist and the informant, especially consid-ering that we’re working in a world shaped by colo-nialism? And what is gender, and how does it work?

All of these questions and more are being posed bytheorists and ethnographers today. Let’s start with afamiliar name, Sherry Ortner, who in the 1970s wrotea famous essay (“Is Female to Male as Nature is to

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Culture,” above) and has been writing ever since. Heressay “Making Gender: Toward a Feminist, Minority,Postcolonial, Subaltern, etc., Theory of Practice”introduces the problem of dealing with structuralforces and agency. Too much emphasis on the formererases the ability of the individual to make decisions;too much emphasis on the latter often results in ablame-the-victim mentality. Ortner proposes usingpractice theory (sometimes called “praxis theory”) toanalyze how people negotiate their own agency andpower within the constraints of structural forces.What does this have to do with gender? Practicetheory allows one, Ortner argues, to look at motiva-tions and constraints without being blinded by orignoring gender, as well as seeing gender as a systemin which people have a certain amount of agencywhile dealing with the constraints of their culture.

Lila Abu-Lughod suggests a different theory and adifferent method. Her theory is inextricably inter-twined with her ethnography, and she engages a pro-gram of “writing against culture.” In Writing Women’sWorlds: Bedouin Stories (1993), Abu-Lughod suggeststhat anthropology uses ethnography and the con-cept of “the culture” as a form of division and differ-ence, and she sets up her ethnography—the storiesof individual women, told in their words (althoughchosen, arranged, and translated by Abu-Lughod)—to combat that. There is no commentary, no frameas there was with Shostak’s Nisa. Abu-Lughod pre-sents us with the lives of individual women (in a call-back to the ethnographic biography), in order to letreaders find their own commonalities with Bedouinwomen.

An excellent example of a positioned ethnographicbiography is Ruth Behar’s Translated Woman: Crossingthe Border With Esperanza’s Story, which deals withissues not only of translation and border crossings inher recounting of one Mexican woman’s life but alsowith identity, both Esperanza’s and her own. Behar,considered Cubana and a Spanish speaker in theUnited States, is a gringa in Mexico, and her dualidentity is one of the things that she reflects onin the epilogue, as well as Esperanza’s identity as amestitza and a native of a country poorer than herown. Power struggles, poverty, language, and race alltie into Behar’s and Esperanza’s identities as women.This ethnographical biography examines the powerrelationship between the ethnographer and the infor-mant as well as their more intimate relationship astwo women who were friends and comadres.

Ruth Behar was also a coeditor, with Deborah A.Gordon, of the Women Writing Culture (1995) collec-tion, a book that ambitiously looks beyond collectingethnographies or theories to the creation of a feministcanon in the anthropology of women. The Intro-duction by Behar suggests the creation of such acanon of anthropological theory, and the volume’sessays suggest an emphasis on a new vision of anthro-pology. While this book might be more firmly placedin “feminist anthropology” than in “the anthropologyof women,” it is telling that the ethnographiespublished in it—Smadar Lavie’s work with thirdworld women poets in Israel, for example, and AiwhaOng’s essay on views of Chinese women—are ofwomen. Feminist anthropology is concerned not justwith the anthropology of women, but it is definitelyconcerned with it, and that concern is reflected in thisvolume.

Both current concerns with gender theory and par-ticular populations are reflected in Kath Weston’swork. Weston researched gender and gender identityamong lesbians in her book Render Me, Gender Me:Lesbians Talk Class, Color, Nation, Studmuffins . . .(1996). Both the idea that gender is not inextricablylinked to the division between male and female andthe identification of lesbians as a population that havehistorically not been well researched make Weston’swork highly valuable in the anthropology of women.

Certain elements in the study of reproduction andmotherhood have been a focus of researchers in theanthropology of women all along. Nancy Scheper-Hughes, in her classic ethnography Death WithoutWeeping: The Violence of Everyday Life in Brazil(1992), looked at maternity and child death amongthe poorest of the poor in Brazil, using a study ofsocietal and political forces to show that the lives ofpoor women are both strategic and embedded inlarger social forces that produce poverty.

All of these examples (taken from a much largercanon) of ethnography about women showcase thediversity of current writing about women and theo-rizing about women and anthropology. Despite—orperhaps because of—the many different theoreticalapproaches to the anthropology of women today, it isa flourishing and fascinating field.

— Keridwen N. Luis

See also Anthropology of Men; Ethnographic Writing;Gender; Mead, Margaret; Sex Roles

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CAREERS IN138

Further Readings

Reiter, R. R. (1975). Toward an anthropology ofwomen. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Rosaldo, M. Z., & Louise L. (Eds.). (1974). Woman,culture, and society. Stanford, CA: StanfordUniversity Press.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, CAREERS IN

In all their professional endeavors, anthropologistsstudy human experience and behavior within a cul-tural context, which means that they can be employedin a wide array of settings. While the market for acad-emic anthropologists has remained relatively lim-ited, opportunities for nonacademic employment ofanthropologists have expanded. The demand for thoseable to analyze and interpret the ever-increasingvolume of data for government, business, and nonprof-its is escalating. As a result, a new subfield, applied andpracticing anthropology, is gaining ground within thediscipline where anthropological knowledge, method-ology, and theories are employed to initiate or facili-tate action to address a community or organization’sproblems. This entry describes the variety of settingsand roles in which anthropologists work, the trainingand skills required, the nature of institutional sup-port, and typical work conditions for this profession.

Job Settings

Globalization has altered the nature of the anthro-pological job market, with government agencies,transnational and international corporations, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and nonprofitsrequiring a deeper understanding of diverse culturesand increased accountability and evaluation tocompete for funds and sustainability as never before.With increasing migration and the resulting mega-urbanization, the preservation of culture and tradi-tional lifeways remains an ongoing concern. Clearly,anthropologists’ training ideally suits them for thistype of work. Anthropology is uniquely applicable tothe 21st-century job market, which is increasinglyglobal, diverse, and user oriented.

Anthropologists can pursue either the traditionalacademic arena or a career path as practitioners.

Academic jobs are based at universities and colleges,where anthropologists teach and conduct research,occasionally supplemented with some outside appliedwork. However, over the last 30 years, the majority ofanthropologists with master’s and doctoral degreeshave found employment in nonacademic settings,working as researchers, consultants, and advocates forcommunities, government agencies, organizations, andcorporations. Practicing anthropologists most typicallyuse their skills to facilitate action or to provide informa-tion for policymakers to better human conditions.

Anthropologists work in a variety of domains,including but not limited to agriculture, archeology,business and industry, criminal justice, culturalresources, development, education, energy develop-ment, environment, government, health care, humanrights, museums, natural resources, law enforcement,nutrition, public housing, recreation, resettlement,substance abuse, transportation, urban development,and wildlife. Jobs vary greatly and often are notlabeled as “anthropologist.” Instead, their positionmay be called researcher, evaluator, impact assessor,consultant, mediator, program director, administra-tor, manager, management analyst, human resourcesspecialist, curator, historic preservationist, marketingexpert, housing director, international developmentofficer, development or environmental consultant,diplomat or local government official, police special-ist, substance abuse counselor, human ecologist,forensic specialist, fundraiser, or cross-culturaltrainer. All these roles may not be directly related toanthropology, but there are multiple ways an anthro-pology background can enhance a person’s job per-formance in these as well as other positions.According to a National Science Foundation survey, amajority of people earning sociology and anthropol-ogy degrees in 2000 in the United States found jobsonly somewhat or not at all related to their field.

Some practicing roles may require technicalknowledge of fields related to the job, such as famil-iarity with crop and livestock production, commoditymarkets, and related policy and regulation in the fieldof agricultural development. Typically, anthropolo-gists also become educated in fields related to thedomain in which they practice. For example, an agri-cultural anthropologist would most likely need tohave a working knowledge of agricultural economicsand plant biology related to food productivity. Thisinterdisciplinary aspect often entails interactionamong government agencies (at home and abroad)

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CAREERS IN 139

and their constituents, translators, and medical per-sonnel; other social scientists such as psychologistsand sociologists; public policy officials, statisticians,and market researchers; and the community or indi-viduals being studied. The intrinsic collaboration ofapplied work requires that the anthropologist beskilled in negotiating competing interests and stakes.Anthropologists working in the private sector oftenhave additional administrative or managerial res-ponsibilities, such as handling budgets and staff,negotiating contracts successfully, and meeting mar-keting needs. They also figure prominently in deci-sions regarding policy and programs, acting as changeagents by scrutinizing a topic and providing recom-mendations based on findings.

Training and Skills

The skill set acquired by anthropology students resultsin much flexibility in the job market. According tothe American Anthropological Association, suchstudents are trained in “careful record-keeping, atten-tion to details, analytical reading, . . . [s]ocial ease instrange situations, [and] critical thinking,” to the morespecific “range of social, behavioral, biological andother scientific research methods . . . supplement[ing]statistical findings with descriptive data gatheredthrough participant observation, interviewing, andethnographic study.” However, a career in which one isspecifically employed as an anthropologist, eitherwithin the academy or without, requires an advanceddegree. A doctorate can involve extensive time commit-ment in fieldwork sometimes entailing inconvenienttransportation and poor living conditions. Fieldworkculminates in the writing of a dissertation, which isoften the basis of a first book. Those interested in anacademic career in anthropology should be aware ofthe level of commitment required: the length of time tocomplete a doctorate in anthropology after the under-graduate degree can reach 8 to 9 years, with as much as12 to 30 months spent on a field project as the subject ofthe dissertation. Still, the many rewards of an academiccareer in anthropology are reflected in the increasingnumber of students in masters’ (from 297 in 1966 to950 in 2000) and doctoral (from 109 in 1996 to 448 in2000) anthropology programs in the United States.

A broad training in anthropology prepares a studentequally for nonacademic and academic positions, asboth roles require the same basic skills and knowledgegrounded in ethnographic practices research, data

collection, data analysis, secondary data use, andinformation dissemination. Since traditional long-term ethnography is still the cornerstone of anthro-pological work, data collection and evaluationmethods require quantitative and qualitative skillssuch as interviewing and keen observation, datarecording, transcribing, coding and analysis, and theability to design research that quantitatively testshypotheses. Quantitative skills, including facility withstatistical analysis software such as SPSS or SAS, arecritical for practicing or academic work. All anthro-pologists are expected to have a strong understandingof complex societies and anthropological theory andthe ability to adapt to diverse settings and people.

Practicing jobs require more time-sensitive research,since those supplying the funding for research oftenset the deadlines. This means practitioners must beprepared to adapt to a chosen specialization at anytime and learn new methodologies that incorporatemore efficient practices such as rapid assessmentprocedures (RAP) and participation action research(PAR), which involve innovative forms of directobservation and participation by the study popula-tion using focus groups, streamlined surveys, aerialphotographs, satellite imagery, GIS or spatial map-ping, and role playing. In addition, students areencouraged to gain training or take coursework in asubstantive field related to their career objectives,such as health, nutrition, agriculture, environment,administration, law, economics, education, technicalwriting, communications, computers, and publicspeaking. For example, an individual with interests inenvironmental justice would be better qualified withadditional education in environmental science, orsomeone with an interest in health care could pursueadditional training in public health.

Written and oral communication skills are equallyessential to professionals in anthropology; however,many programs do not specifically teach these skills.While student teaching and preparation of termpapers, theses, and dissertations, journal articles, andconference presentations can help build communica-tion skills, these activities alone cannot teach properproposal and report writing, which are crucial forobtaining funding and functioning as practicinganthropologists. Neither do they fully prepare profes-sionals in training for producing the type of accessi-ble exposition demanded for the dissemination offindings—bulletins, brochures, monographs, policyreports, press releases, formal letters, persuasive

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CAREERS IN140

reports, educational videos and informative radio,and so on. Most anthropologists are compelled tolearn these skills on the job.

Finally, gaining applied experience helps studentspractice their skills in a real setting, obtain feedbackon methodologies employed, and see the connectionsbetween research policy decisions and the impact ofthose actions on individuals and communities.Traditional anthropology is often characterized byextended trips to remote locations; however, thepresent-day reality of anthropological research fre-quently involves short-term research projects andconsulting. Instead of face-to-face time being neces-sary for fieldwork, researchers can now use techno-logically advanced systems for survey and analysisand communication via Internet and telephone.Students can gain experience in such practical appli-cation through a number of venues: enrollment in amaster’s practicum; conducting research with faculty;securing paid or unpaid work with cooperative edu-cation programs, groups like the Peace Corps, orcommunity or local human service agencies; orthrough finding relevant internships.

Institutional Support

Key sources for job listings vary, depending on sub-field and area of interest. The primary means for

finding employment as an anthropologist includeonline networking forums like AnthroTECH.com’sAnthroDesign or on anthropological association Websites such as those of the American AnthropologicalAssociation (AAA: aaanet.org), the Society for AppliedAnthropology (SfAA: sfaa.net), the National Associa-tion of Practicing Anthropologists (NAPA: practicinganthropology.org), and the Washington Associationof Professional Anthropologists (WAPA: smcm.edu/wapa); and in various publications, such as the AAAAnthropology Newsletter. Networking continues to bea significant source for locating career opportunitiesand enhancing skills.

Joining professional associations and attendingand participating in meetings, forums, and confer-ences helps individuals entering the field gain recog-nition within the discipline and the latest informationon emerging methodologies and technological inno-vations, all of which can aid in finding work or inadvancing professionally. At the national level, suchorganizations include the AAA, SfAA, NAPA, WAPA,and the High Plains Society for Applied Anthropo-logy (HPSfAA). At the local level, groups like theNortheastern Anthropological Association and field-specific groups like the Society for Medical Anthro-pology, the Political Ecology Society, and theIndo-Pacific Prehistory Association are often equallyhelpful. In August 1948, the International Union of

Anthropological and Ethno-logical Sciences (IUAES)was founded to meet theneed for a worldwide net-work. In 1993, anthropo-logical groups from theUnited States, France, GreatBritain, Mexico, Canada, andthe former USSR, amongothers, developed the Com-mission on Anthropology inPolicy and Practice withinIUAES to develop a similarnetwork among the expo-nentially growing appliedand practicing fields.Reflecting the breadth ofinterests involved, theIUAES has 27 committees,several of which indicate thechanges in anthropologyover the last century andSource: © Margaret Maples Gilliland.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CAREERS IN 141

include Aging and the Aged, AIDS, Documentation,Food and Food Problems, Cultural Dimensions ofGlobal Change, Medical Anthropology and Epi-demiology, Museums and Cultural Heritage, Tourism,Urban Anthropology, Indigenous Knowledge andSustainable Development, Mathematics, Bioethics,and Human Rights and Primatology.

Work Conditions

Anthropologists commonly work with others out-side their discipline. The intrinsic interdisciplinarynature of their nonacademic work demands collabo-ration and translates into competition for jobs notonly from other anthropologists but also from thosewith whom anthropologists often work, includingsociologists, psychologists, statisticians, marketresearchers. In terms of salaries, those who work ininstitutions of higher learning in the United Statescould expect a salary from mid-$30,000 to $70,000or higher for an academic year, depending on theyears of experience and institution of employment.According to the National Education Association, theaverage salary for anthropology faculty in 1999–2000was $56,391 for public and $60,085 for independent4-year institutions. Nonacademic work for govern-ment and private sectors offers slightly highersalaries in comparison, also dependent upon yearsof experience and employer. According to the AAAbiennial survey of anthropology PhDs, 29% of1997 U.S. PhD graduates took nonacademic jobs.Interestingly, respondents employed in nonacademicpositions were slightly more satisfied with theiremployment situations than those who were acade-mically employed.

Applied anthropologists sometimes experienceproblems in their roles relative to sponsors’ demandsand possible resulting ethical dilemmas, as well as incer-titude when it comes to power or control. Occasionally,practitioners complain about not having enoughpower to ensure follow-through with recommenda-tions for action or policy, but few seek positions ofpower. In 2000, the National Association for thePractice of Anthropology (NAPA) sponsored a surveyof members with masters in applied anthropology, inwhich 22% identified their current roles as managersand about 10% as administrators. Anthropologistsneed to realize that they must take positions thatenable them to make decisions without losing the

dynamic that is at the heart of anthropology—therelationship with the study community or indi-viduals. There are instances where anthropologistscannot simply make a scientific decision. They mayfeel constrained by client wishes and fall into therole of social technician or social engineer withoutmuch input from the study population. Alternatively,practitioners may choose to make moral judgmentsregarding their work by preselecting clients withsimilar ideologies.

Anthropologists must use existing ethical guide-lines (especially from professional associations suchas AAA, SfAA, and NAPA), laws, and policies to makesound professional judgments by relying upon aframework that can help balance the pulls betweenpositivistic science, morality, and client needs. It isimportant that anthropologists understand thatthough ethical considerations must be part of anyprofessional decision, they are not the sole determi-nant. Such a professional framework is an essentialfoundation to building sound judgment for pursuinga successful career in anthropology.

— Satish Kedia

See also Anthropology, Practicing

Further Readings

Baba, M. L. (1998). Creating a global community ofpracticing anthropologists. Human Organization57(3), 315–318.

Baer, R. D., Bustillo, M., Lewis, H., Perry, W., Romeo,D., Slorah, P., & Willis, C. (1995). Appliedanthropology: From the classroom to thecommunity. Human Organization 54(3),325–329.

Gwynne, M. A. (2003). Anthropology career resourceshandbook. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Kedia, S., & van Willigen, J. (Eds.). (in press). Appliedanthropology: Domains of application. Westport,CT: Greenwood.

Omohundro, J. T. (1998). Careers in anthropology.Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.

Price, L. J. (2001). The mismatch betweenanthropology graduate training and the worklives of graduates. Practicing Anthropology, 23(1),55–57.

Stephens, W. R. (2002). Careers in anthropology: Whatan anthropology degree can do for you. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CHARACTERISTICS OF142

4 ANTHROPOLOGY,CHARACTERISTICS OF

Anthropology is the study of people, society, andculture through all time and everywhere aroundthe world. Three of its main characteristics are anongoing debate between evolutionism and culturalrelativism, the use of cross-culture comparison,and ethnographic research based on “participantobservation.”

Anthropology shares certain basic characteristicswith her sister disciplines of biology, history, sociol-ogy, political science, and economics. These character-istics arise from a common Enlightenment heritage.One is an emphasis on collecting information bymeans of the human senses, rather than from revela-tion or authority. A second is the interplay betweengeneral understandings, usually labeled theory, andspecific information, sometimes called data, used asevidence to support or to challenge a general under-standing. And a third is the expectation that generalunderstandings will change and improve as informa-tion becomes more complete.

These characteristics have not gone totally unchal-lenged in recent times. Influential thinkers sometimescome to be regarded as beyond criticism, their pro-nouncements deemed authoritative and not open todebate. In the anthropology of the 1970s, Karl Marxwas deemed to be such an authority, and criticsseemed to be worthy of excommunication. Thisphase passed with the fall of the Soviet Union. Morerecently, from the 1990s, the Enlightenment founda-tion has been attacked on philosophical grounds bypostmodernism, which rejects knowledge gainedthrough the senses and any formulations of generalknowledge, and replaces them with analytic decon-struction and subjective expressionism and politicalcommitment. This self-identified “experimental”phase has not as yet established a substantive alterna-tive to Enlightenment anthropology, and so its off-spring remains unknown.

With this background in mind, let us turn to thecharacteristics that distinguish anthropology fromher sister disciplines. I will present this discussion interms of three characteristics: first, the theoreticaldebate between evolutionism and cultural relativism;second, the analytical device of cross-cultural com-parative analysis; and third, the methodologicalstrategy of “participant observation.”

Evolutionism and Relativism

During its emergence in the 19th century, anthropol-ogy was inspired by and absorbed the dominant“master discourse” of the time, evolutionism. Theplace was Great Britain, and the circumstance wasimperial and colonial expansion, and contact andengagement with other peoples and other cultures.Models of evolution, originally conceived in geologyand biology, which were being applied by foundationsociologists to the stunning, transformational socialchanges in Britain and Europe during the 18th cen-tury and continuing into the 19th, were applied byfoundation anthropologists, in some cases the samescholars who were founding sociology, to culturaldifferences of peoples around the world.

As with biological evolutionism generally, anthro-pological evolutionism posited higher and lowerlevels of accomplishment, of development, of humanand social existence. Particular societies and culturesaround the world could be identified accordingto their level of achievement; in one scheme, the levels,each defined by technology and social arrange-ments, were labeled “savagery,” “barbarism,” or“civilization.” Even the theoretical alternative of dif-fusionism, which stressed borrowing rather thaninternal development and identified centers of cre-ations and secondary recipients, was consistent withthe comparative spirit.

Evidence relevant to placing particular peoples andcultures was diverse: biological for racial differences,linguistic for language differences, archaeological forhistorical differences, literary for historical differenceswith classical and other literate societies, and culturalfor current patterns. However, during the 19th cen-tury, most anthropologists were “armchair anthro-pologists,” relying on first- or secondhand reportsfrom others for their information or “data.” The mostprominent anthropologist of his time, Sir JamesFrazer, author of The Golden Bough, when asked if hehad met any of the “savages” of whom he had spoken,famously (these days: incorrectly) replied “Heavenforbid, Madam.”

The early 20th century brought with it a reactionagainst and shift away from evolutionism, particu-larly in sociocultural anthropology. This resulted (atleast in part) from firsthand contact by anthropolo-gists with the cultures under study by anthropolo-gists, which led to three new emphases: first, thestudy of cultures in all (or at least more) of their great

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CHARACTERISTICS OF 143

complexity and richness, instead of as illustrationsof a few general and abstract categories; second,the study of cultures as wholes, as opposed to therecording of one or two traits or characteristics;and, third, the study of cultures on their own terms,without applying external criteria of evaluation,which is what we mean by cultural relativism.

This development can be seen in the work ofBronislaw Malinowski and Alfred Reginald Radcliffe-Brown, who established British social anthropology,with its emphasis on social relations, and Boas, whoestablished New World cultural anthropology, with itsfocus on conventional knowledge. These schools, inaddition to sharing the points mentioned above, dif-fered on some points: In Britain, social anthropologydeveloped more or less independently of archaeologyand prehistory, linguistics, and physical-biologicalanthropology, while in the New World, Boas champi-oned “four-field” anthropology, the continuing associa-tion of archaeology, linguistics, physical anthropology,and cultural anthropology. And, while some Britishsocial anthropologists advocated and attemptedcomparison and generalization, Boas favored a moreparticularistic and relativisitic approach, emphasiz-ing historical and descriptive accounts of particularcultures.

Subsequent theoretical developments in 20th- and21st-century anthropology can be read, at least inpart, as a debate between the cultural relativismestablished in early sociocultural anthropology andthe evolutionism rooted in the 19th century. A con-stant side dialogue with prehistoric archaeology,which more consistently maintained the evolution-ary approach (although some contemporary archae-ologists disdain the term) kept the evolutionarytradition easily within reach. In New World culturalanthropology, the evolutionary approach was resus-citated twice in the mid-20th century, once by theinfluential University of Michigan evolutionaryschool and two decades later by the emergence of amajor movement of Marxist anthropology, Marx ofcourse having been a major 19th-century evolution-ary thinker. Cultural relativism strode back withinterpretive anthropology and more recently post-modernism, which extends cultural relativism toepistemological relativism and thus advocates partic-ularity and subjectivity.

Thus, it appears that a central characteristic ofanthropology is its ongoing, and apparently endless,debate between evolutionism and relativism.

Cross-Cultural Analysis

Comparison is a basic element in human thinking,whether in juxtaposing instances or cases for purposesof evaluation (“This tea is better than that”) or in orderto establish concomitant variations (“This color makesme look healthy”; “That color makes me look sick”).Anthropology’s sister disciplines constantly engage incomparative analysis: “Members of the middle class area, b, and c, while members of the working class are d, e,and f.” “Businesses with a unionized labor force mustdo x, y, and z, while those without do m, n, and o.”

What sets anthropology apart is its emphasis oncross-cultural comparison. Even particularists cannotavoid cross-cultural comparison, for even descriptionrequires categories that indicate similarity and differ-ence. Whether explicit or implicit, cross-cultural com-parison is always present in anthropology, for we canhardly avoid thinking of the cultures we study as simi-lar to or different from our own and others we knowof. Margaret Mead was quite explicit in Coming of Agein Samoa, comparing girls’ puberty in Samoa withgirls’ adolescence in America. Bronislaw Malinowski inSex and Repression in Savage Society compares the oedi-pal complex in patriarchal Europe with that in thematrilineal Trobriands. Ruth Benedict’s Patterns ofCulture is a paradigmatic example of particularisticcomparison, which, while identifying general types,remains at the descriptive level, disdaining the searchfor concomitant variations.

Comparison is the main analytic tool of anthropol-ogy, because, unlike laboratory scientists, anthropolo-gists cannot pursue their studies with experiments. Norare the statistical exercises of the economist usuallyavailable to the anthropologist, who commonly worksin or on societies in which systematic collection of eco-nomic data did not or do not exist. Nor are the surveysof the sociologist and political scientist usually feasible,and even if they were, they would simply add grist forthe comparative mill. Cross-cultural comparison pro-vides anthropologists with a wider field of view, both inspace and time, than that of the sister disciplines, whichcommonly limit their studies to one or a few similarsocieties. The breadth of anthropology, thanks to cross-cultural comparison, is one of its main strengths.

Participant Observation

The primary methodological strategy of culturalanthropology is participant observation, immersion

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CLINICAL144

among the people being studied and engagementwith them through taking part in their activities anddiscussing with them their activities. Direct observa-tion and face-to-face conversation with the peopleunder examination are central elements in ethno-graphic fieldwork, which is the other label used forparticipant observation. This direct engagement isnecessary because the first goal of ethnographic field-work is to understand the culture and society fromthe point of view of the people themselves—tounderstand it as they do.

Reconstructing from the past obviously precludesthis strategy. Archaeologists and prehistorians must relyupon the remains from past cultures, whether materialsuch as bones and buildings or documentary fromwritten records, as sources of information for the infer-ences required for drawing a picture of the culture. Andanthropology’s sister disciplines prefer short-term, for-mal measures, with sociologists favoring questionnairesurveys, political scientists questionnaires or organiza-tional charts, and economists aggregate statistical data.

Participant observation has both strengths and lim-itations. One limitation is that working face-to-facewith a handful of people, whether in one communityor in a “multiple site” study, makes it difficult to knowhow representative the people, and thus the informa-tion gleaned from and about them, is of any largerpopulation and culture. Another limitation is that“contact” and “engagement” with the people understudy are vague terms requiring no particular tech-nique and no mandated precision. The result caneasily be strong sentiments and vague impressions. Onthe other hand, participant observation can makepossible an intimate knowledge based on repeatedobservation and on triangulation, the drawing onmultiple sources of information to test and retestunderstanding. And careful attention to local perspec-tives can reduce misinterpretation, which is a greatrisk with formal measures predesigned by outsiders.In short, one of the great strengths of anthropology isthat participant observation brings the researcherclosest to the people, or rather, to some people.

The spirit and substance of anthropology havebeen formed and expressed in the pursuit of and thedebate between evolutionism and cultural relativism,in the analytic exercise of cross-cultural comparison,and in the practice of fieldwork by means of partici-pant observation.

— Philip Carl Salzman

See also Anthropology, History of; Cross-CulturalResearch; Cultural Relativism; Participant Observation

Further Readings

Kuper, A. (1988). The invention of primitive society.London: Routledge.

Kuper, A. (1996). Anthropology and anthropologists:The modern British school (3rd ed.). London:Routledge.

Salzman, P. C. (2001). Understanding culture: Anintroduction to anthropological theory. ProspectHeights, IL: Waveland Press.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, CLINICAL

The defining characteristic of clinically appliedanthropology is that it is anthropology practiced inhealth care settings: hospitals, clinics, health profes-sional schools, and health care delivery systems of allkinds. The health care arena is so wide ranging andcomplex that it almost requires the kind of completeimmersion that comes from working within the systemitself and with its practitioners in order to do relevantresearch, theory building, teaching, and consulting.Anthropologists working within this branch of anthro-pology apply data, theory, and methods that clarifyspecific clinical issues and suggest changes in patientcare, health maintenance, and health care delivery.

Alternative names have been suggested for the sub-discipline: “clinical anthropology,” “clinically appliedanthropology,” “clinically applied medical anthropol-ogy,” and “applied medical anthropology.” The criticalissue in the choice of a name turns on the roles theanthropologist necessarily must assume in the healthcare setting. Early on, concerns were expressed aboutthe title “clinical anthropologist,” a title that wasthought indirectly to imply that the anthropologistcould perform patient interventions. With the excep-tion of those anthropologists who have additionallicensure in medicine, nursing, or therapy, there arelegal/liability issues in their involvement in directpatient care beyond that of a consultant to licensedhealth care providers. This concept of a restrictedrole vis-à-vis patients is not shared by all: clinicalanthropologist and naturopathic doctor John Rushargues for a hands-on therapeutic role for clinical

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CLINICAL 145

anthropologists. However, the roles assumed byanthropologists who apply their skills within clinicalsettings are, by and large, those of teacher, consultant,and researcher. Usually, the clinically applied anthro-pologist combines all three. The term “clinicallyapplied anthropology” will be used in this entry.

The field began to be distinguished as a separatesubdiscipline of medical anthropology in the late1970s and early 1980s with the appearance of thewritings and research activities of the following indi-viduals: Arthur Kleinman, Leon Eisenberg, ByronGood, Noel Chrisman, Thomas Maretzki, DimetriShimkin, and Peggy Golde. The activities of theseanthropologists and their colleagues announced atrend that was to run through the subdiscipline fromthat time to the current day: the close, interdiscipli-nary collaboration between health care professionalsand anthropologists. Three early writings are illus-trative of this collaboration, with the first being aseminal article, “Culture, Illness, and Care: ClinicalLessons from Anthropologic and Cross-CulturalResearch,” by physician anthropologist Kleinman,psychiatrist Eisenberg, and anthropologist Good.Both the edited books by Chrisman and Maretzki,Clinically Applied Anthropology, and Shimkin andGolde, Clinical Anthropology, are comprised of chapterswritten by anthropologists, physicians, psychologists,psychiatrists, and others working in direct patientcare. At about this same time, anthropologist-nursesbegan to make their influence known in the work ofPamela Brink and Madeleine Leininger.

Biomedical Culture as aFocus of Research and Analysis

in Clinically Applied Anthropology

Anthropologists who have centered their work inhealth care settings have, in a very real sense, entered awell-defined and pervasive culture, that of biomedicine,that is very different, sometimes antithetical to, theculture of the social sciences. In terms of time man-agement, behavioral norms, vocabulary, values, and,especially epistemological perspective, biomedicineand anthropology are worlds apart. The tensionbetween the positivist, empiricist worldview thatsuffuses biomedicine and its allied fields and themostly interpretive, constructivist approaches tohuman sickness and suffering that characterize muchof anthropological thought is broadly discussed inthe writings of Fabrega, Kleinman, Hahn, and Good.

What constitutes knowledge and knowledge claimsin anthropological understandings of illness are oftennot considered central to the diagnosis and treat-ment of disease in biomedicine. This contrast hascreated obstacles, difficult but not at all insurmount-able, for anthropologists who work in health care set-tings. In some degree, anthropologists have foundsignificant subject matter for theoretical formulationsand research about human sickness in the contrastbetween the traditional perspectives of anthropologyand biomedicine.

For example, a major focus of research for anthro-pologists in clinical settings has been that of examin-ing and describing the characteristics of the culture ofbiomedicine itself and the role of physicians as cen-tral actors in this hierarchical universe. The socializa-tion into that culture of students as they becomeclinicians and acquire what Good has called the“medical gaze” has been another closely examinedsubject for anthropologists. This unique way of seeingthe body and the world of disease permeates theworld of health care as a particular and distilledexpression of Western rational and object-centeredthought. Clinically applied anthropologists generallysee this narrowness of focus in biomedicine as a fail-ure to treat suffering patients as whole personswithin sociocultural contexts of meaning. They havetaken the opportunity to build contrasting modelsof human suffering through mental and physicaldisorder that emphasize illness as experienced bypatients within a wider experiential and symbolicworld as described by Kleinman and Hahn.

Taking a somewhat different perspective in hisexamination of biomedical culture, critical medicalanthropologist Merrill Singer, from his vantage asresearcher at the Hartford Health Clinic, mounted acritique of medical anthropology in general and therole of anthropologists in health settings in particular.He and other anthropologist colleagues such as HansBaer and Nancy Scheper-Hughes saw many clinicallyapplied anthropologists as having “bought in” to thepower structure that constitutes the biomedicalsystem. The critical medical anthropologists pointedout that the distribution of illnesses suffered bypatient populations, their access and response to care,and differential treatment outcomes were the result ofmacrolevel socioeconomic and political forces thatwere replicated and perpetuated in the biomedicalsystem. Another allegation made by this critique wasthat anthropologists who do research and other work

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


in the health care system perpetuate the inequitieswithin it by ignoring the structural and political fac-tors that cause these disparities. Many clinical anthro-pologists disputed this allegation, calling attention toa long tradition in medical and clinically appliedanthropology of examining these factors in the socialproduction of disease and expressing an unwilling-ness to reduce illness and the interactions betweenpatients and health care systems solely to the para-digm of class struggle.

Clinical Anthropologists as Educators

Despite the differences in perspective between bio-medicine and anthropology, or perhaps, ironically,because of them, clinically applied anthropologistshave found important niches in medical and healthcare settings as teachers and consultants. Cliniciansand others who design health care delivery systemsare ultimately concerned with successful patient out-comes, and such outcomes are very inconsistentlyobtained despite the ongoing development of newdiagnostic methods, medicines, and treatmentmodalities. The last two decades have seen a growingemphasis on patient-centered care and the impor-tance for clinicians of building workable therapeuticalliances with their patients. Within this context, the“anthropological gaze” has come to be valued, partic-ularly in medical and nursing schools.

In many schools, clinical anthropologists havemade a contribution through teaching health careprofessionals anthropological techniques and con-cepts useful to their everyday practices. Teachers andtrainers have concentrated their efforts most success-fully in two areas: enhancing patient/provider com-munication and integrating patients’ socioculturalcontext into diagnosis and treatment planning. Forexample, one of the most enduring and clinically use-ful techniques taught was Kleinman’s method foreliciting a patient’s explanatory model (EM) of his orher sickness through a set of several questions thatmight be used in taking a history or making a differ-ential diagnosis. The questions served to help theclinician grasp the patient’s understandings of thecauses and characteristics of the illness problem andits effect on his or her life. Providing this contextallowed the clinician to move from the narrow per-spective of disease, which considered only the physicalpathology, to a broader view that encompassed thepatient’s illness, the lived experience of the sickness

from the patient’s point of view. Based on this widerunderstanding, the clinician’s communication withthe patient was greatly improved, and negotiating atreatment plan that ensured acceptance was moreprobable. The concept of a patient’s explanatorymodel or emic paradigm has been widely used ineducational and training programs since Kleinmanand his colleagues introduced it.

Early on, according to the writings of NoelChrisman and Robert Ness, medical, dental, phar-macy, and nursing students, as well as other buddinghealth professionals, were found to be initially resis-tant to the teachings of clinical anthropologists andquestioned the relevance of this “soft” subject matterin the curriculum. This resistance persists to this day,though to a lesser degree, and is based on the strongscientific focus of clinical students and their lack offormal training or previous exposure to the socialand behavioral sciences. Teaching clinically appliedanthropologists has successfully overcome suchresistance by concentrating on integrating anthro-pological materials into the teaching of specific skillsrequired of clinicians: healing, educating, and plan-ning. This is done by consistently integrating socialand cultural factors surrounding disease processesalongside discussion of physiological processes, con-necting the dots in the relationship of one to theother. The utility of understanding patients’ perspec-tives and life circumstances is made essential to effec-tive information transfer and treatment planning.Cultural elements are woven into case studies thatstudents then analyze. In the study of epidemiology,concepts of social epidemiology, that is, the social andcultural factors involved in the distribution, symptomexpression, onset, course, treatment, and outcome ofillnesses, are made clear. Clinically applied anthropol-ogists often serve alongside physicians and nurses aspreceptors in community-based clinical rotations.Students are exposed to clinically applied anthropol-ogists when they participate in hospital rounds and asconsultants in case management discussions.

In the last 10 years, as a result of the drive for cul-tural competence/cultural responsiveness in healthcare, teaching of anthropological concepts to practic-ing clinicians working in health management organi-zations, community clinics, hospitals, and mentalhealth facilities has been ongoing. Instead of classesand preceptorships, clinically applied anthropologistsorganize workshops and staff seminars as well asparticipate in grand rounds and resident training.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Innovative strategies gearedto adult learning are used.Geri-Ann Galenti, for exam-ple, has written a verywell-accepted book of cul-tural case studies organizedaround clinical themes thatshe uses as a basis for on-site workshops in hospitalsand clinics. Jean Gilbert, incollaboration with physi-cians, nurses, and healtheducators at Kaiser Perma-nente, has created videovignettes that are case stud-ies of clinical issues relat-ing to pediatrics, obstetrics,internal medicine, geriatrics,and behavioral health.Chrisman has developedprograms in community-based care and culturalmedicine for hospital nurses, hospices, and commu-nity health practitioners. Other anthropologists haveorganized national conferences bringing togetherclinicians, anthropologists, and health care providersand managers from many fields to present and discussissues in cultural medicine. In all of these endeavors,clinically applied anthropologists work closely withpersons from many health care disciplines. This col-laborative approach gives validity to and underscoresthe importance of anthropological data and approachesto quality patient care.

Dual Roles: The ClinicallyApplied Anthropologist Clinician

Doctors, nurses, and behavioral health therapists whoare also anthropologists have been a part of this sub-discipline since its inception. Many do their work asfaculty in medical and nursing schools and as practic-ing physicians. Anthropologist-physicians followingin the footsteps of Kleinman and Eisenberg includeRobert C. Like and Kathleen Culhane-Pera. Like, afamily medicine physician, in collaboration withother physicians and fellow anthropologist ArthurRubel, created a cultural curriculum for familypractice medical students that has served as a modelfor numerous medical programs. Culhane-Pera, afamily physician at Ramsey Family and Community

Medicine Residency in Minnesota, has done extensiveresearch among the Hmong community. Healingby Heart, written by Culhane-Pera in collaborationwith other health care professionals and anthro-pologists (Peter Kundstadter, anthropologist epi-demiologist, and Joseph Westermeyer, anthropologistpsychiatrist), is an in-depth study of the Hmong cul-ture’s interactions with health care providers andthe health care system. It includes a well-detailedmodel for providing culturally responsive care usefulfor curriculum design and practitioner training.

Persons exemplifying the dual roles of anthro-pologist/mental health professional include prac-ticing psychiatrists Horatio Fabrega and JosephWestermeyer and psychologist Richard Castillo.Fabrega has written extensively on the interaction ofbiological and symbolic and cultural factors in men-tal health as well as the role of culture in psychiatricdiagnosis. Joseph Westermeyer has studied alcoholand drug use and substance-related disorders acrossseveral populations. Castillo has focused on cross-cultural psychopathology and psychotherapy. Both heand Fabrega were part of the Group on Culture andDiagnosis who served as cultural advisers on the cul-tural formulation in the fourth version of theDiagnostic and Statistical Manuel (DSM-IV) used indiagnosing patients throughout the mental healthcare field.

Source: © Robert Jurmain.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Nurses were among the first health care professionalsto combine clinical and anthropology degrees, andthey form a special unit within the American Anthro-pological Association. They have their own journal,the Journal of Transcultural Nursing. Examples ofnurse anthropologists include Margie Kagawa-Singer,who is a professor in the School of Public Health,University of California, Los Angeles, with a researchfocus in oncology. Another is Fred Bloom, research-ing in the area of HIV/AIDs and community healthcare utilization at the Centers for Disease Control.Margarita Kay, well known for her research on folkand indigenous medical medicines and practices, is aclinical anthropologist working in Tucson, Arizona,clinics and at the University of Arizona. The list ofclinically applied anthropologists in nursing is exten-sive, and it includes nurses specializing in every aspectof clinical medicine and health care from nutritionto chronic diseases, geriatrics and end-of-life care,genetics, and childbirth.

Clinically Applied Anthropologists asPolicymakers, Advocates, and Consultants

In the three or so decades since medical anthropologybegan to be clinically applied, the structure of healthcare settings, the demographic characteristics of thepatient population, and the politics of health care, allof which form the environment in which clinicallyapplied anthropologists work, have undergone verysignificant changes. Due to immigration, refugeeresettlement, and globalization, many patients enter-ing the health care systems are linguistically andculturally different from members of the clinical pro-fessions. While the latter have certainly become morediverse as to race, ethnicity, and gender, this has onlyincreased the probability that clinicians and theirpatients will not share basic cultural understandingsabout sickness and health. Furthermore, researchbegun in the 1980s and continuing into the presenthas demonstrated persistent inequalities in healthstatus, treatment, and access to care across racial andethnic populations. In an effort to address theseissues, the cultural competency in the health caremovement and field was born, a movement that wasoriginally informed by the work of clinically appliedanthropologists but that now has extended to a muchwider health care base. As active participants, clini-cally applied anthropologists have increasinglybecome advocates, specialists in health care delivery

to diverse populations, and designers of curricula anddiverse forms of training for health care professionals,students, and practicing clinicians. As with mostother work of clinically applied anthropologists, theyhave collaborated in multidisciplinary teams withhealth care providers and community advocates ofmany types. Following are some examples of this kindof involvement.

The creation of the National Standards forCulturally and Linguistically Appropriate Services inHealthcare (CLAS Standards) was begun in an advo-cacy group that included physician anthropologistLike and clinically applied anthropologist Gilbert,working with other health care providers and govern-ment officials. These standards, after national inputfrom all health care sectors, were endorsed and pub-lished by the Department of Health and HumanServices, Office of Minority Health. They provideguidance to health care organizations for enhancingthe quality of care to diverse patient populations.These standards are now being used as benchmarksand guidelines by health care accreditation bodiesas well as state and federal auditors of health-care-providing organizations.

In 2002, clinically applied anthropologists, includ-ing nurse and physician anthropologists, gatheredwith physicians, nurses, health educators, and healthcare and accreditation administrators from acrossthe United States to formulate The Principles andRecommended Standards for the Cultural CompetenceEducation of Healthcare Professionals. This document,the creation of which was underwritten by TheCalifornia Endowment, sets out recommended con-tent, skills development, pedagogical strategies, andevaluation techniques for ensuring that clinicians areeducated to treat diverse patient populations in a cul-turally responsive manner. The principles and recom-mendations are being used in designing curricula byundergraduate and graduate programs of clinicaleducation and in the accreditation of professionalschools. It is anticipated that these materials will con-tinue to be used in many ways as other states, follow-ing the lead of New Jersey, require training in culturalapproaches to patient care as a condition of licensurefor physicians, and cultural medicine is required inthe curricula of medical schools.

Recently, clinically applied anthropologists such asMary-Jo DelVecchio Good have turned their atten-tion to determining the reasons behind differentialtreatment of minority patients, as studies, such as

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


those summarized in the Institute of Medicine reportUnequal Treatment, have indicated that at least someof these patients receive less than adequate care as aprobable result of clinician behavior and poorpatient-clinician interaction. Both physician-patientcommunication and the structuring of health caredelivery and access are being examined to determinehow these statistically significant variations in treat-ment arise.

Anthropologists with research in clinical settingsoften provide consultation to private foundations.For example, Susan Scrimshaw has been involved asan advisory board member on the Robert WoodJohnson Foundation initiative, Hablamos Juntos, aneffort to seek effective ways of providing languageinterpretation in health care to meet the needs of thenow vast number of limited-English speakers in thepatient population. Under grants on this initiative,other clinically applied anthropologists are studyingmethods of interpretation and translation in healthcare settings to determine the most effective methodsof providing these language services in health care set-tings that provide care to linguistically diverse patients.

Clinical anthropologists consult in a number ofcapacities in the public and private sectors. Forexample, they are asked to provide information andadvice to the National Institutes of Health on thedirection of future research and to give help on devel-oping requests for applications (RFAs), Many alsosit on research review study panels. Clinically appliedanthropologists are working with the Department ofHealth and Human Services Health Resources andServices Administration in designing curriculumguidance for the Centers of Excellence medical,nursing, pharmacy, and dental schools.

Anthropologists working in corporate health deliv-ery organizations help set policy and advocate for anddirect research and development programs and caredelivery strategies to meet the needs of diverse patientpopulations. They consult to health care managementand often develop ongoing staff and provider educa-tion programs in cultural medicine. In California, forexample, Medicaid contracts specify that all contract-ing health care organizations, public and private, mustprovide for the cultural competence education ofpractitioners and support staff, as well as manage theirhealth care delivery practices and linguistic services soas to meet the needs of diverse patients.

Clinically applied anthropologists’ strong ethno-graphic research backgrounds in many areas of health

care as well as their close familiarity with the clinicaland care delivery environments equip them well forserving in a wide variety of research, teaching, consul-tant, and policymaking positions. Equally helpful istheir experience in collaborating across health caredisciplines and their flexibility in moving from clini-cal to teaching settings. As a result, the field of clini-cally applied anthropology is continuing to expand inthe United States as the nation focuses more andmore on the issues of health care in its diverse andaging population.

— M. Jean Gilbert

Further Readings

Brink, P. (1976). Transcultural nursing: A book ofreadings. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Chrisman, N. J., & Maretzki, T. W. (Eds.). (1982).Clinically applied anthropology: Anthropologistsin health science settings. Dordrecht, Holland:D. Reidel.

Culhane-Pera, K., Vawter, D. E., Xiong, P., Babbitt, B.,& Solberg, M. M. (Eds.). (2003). Clinical andethical case stories of Hmong families and Westernproviders. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt Press.

DelVecchio Good, C., James, M-J., Good, B., & Becker,A. E. (2002). The culture of medicine and racial,ethnic, and class disparities in health care.Supplement to Brian D. Smedley, AdriennneY. Stith, & Alan Nelson (Eds.), Unequal treatment:Confronting racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

DeSantis, L. (2001). Culture reorientation ofregistered nurse students. Journal of TransculturalNursing, 12(4), 310–318.

Galanti, G.-A. (2004). Caring for patients fromdifferent cultures (3rd ed.). Philadelphia: Universityof Pennsylvania Press.

Gilbert, M. J. (2002). Principles and recommendedstandards for cultural competence education ofhealth care professionals. Los Angeles: CaliforniaEndowment.

Hahn, R. A. (1995). Sickness and healing. Ananthropological perspective. New Haven, CT: YaleUniversity Press.

Mezzich, J. E., Kleinman, A., Fabrega, H., Jr., &Parron, D. L. (Eds.). (1996). Culture & psychiatricdiagnosis: A DSM-IV perspective. Washington, DC:American Psychiatric Press.

Rush, J. A. (1996). Clinical anthropology: Anapplication of anthropological concepts withinclinical settings. Westport, CT: Prager.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CULTURAL150

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, CULTURAL

Defining Cultural Anthropology

Cultural anthropology is the study of human patternsof thought and behavior, and how and why thesepatterns differ, in contemporary societies. Culturalanthropology is sometimes called social anthropology,sociocultural anthropology, or ethnology. Culturalanthropology also includes pursuits such as ethnogra-phy, ethnohistory, and cross-cultural research.

Cultural anthropology is one of the four subdisci-plines of anthropology. The other subdisciplinesinclude biological anthropology, archaeology, and lin-guistic anthropology. Some anthropologists include afifth subdiscipline, applied anthropology, althoughother anthropologists see applied anthropology as anapproach that crosscuts traditional subdisciplinaryboundaries rather than as a subdiscipline itself. Inthe United States, the subfields tend to be unified:Departments of anthropology include all of the sub-fields within their academic structures. In Europe,however, subdisciplines often reside in different acade-mic departments. These differences between Americanand European anthropology are due more to historicalthan philosophical differences in how the disciplinedeveloped.

The central organizing concept of cultural anthro-pology is culture, which is ironic given that culture islargely an abstraction that is difficult to measure andeven more difficult to define, given the high numberof different definitions of the concept that populateanthropology textbooks. Despite over a century ofanthropology, the most commonly used definition ofanthropology is Edward Burnett Tylor’s, who in 1871defined culture as “that complex whole that includesknowledge, belief, art, law, morals, custom, and anyother capabilities and habits acquired by [humans] asmembers of a society.”

Tylor’s definition is resonant with contemporaryanthropologists because it points to some important,universally agreed-upon aspects of culture, eventhough it does not satisfactorily define what culture is.Teachers of cultural anthropology often cite culture asa constellation of features that work together to guidethe thoughts and behaviors of individuals and groupsof humans. Aspects of culture often seen in introduc-tory classes include: (1) Culture is commonly sharedby a population or group of individuals; (2) cultural

patterns of behavior are learned, acquired, andinternalized during childhood; (3) culture is generallyadaptive, enhancing survival and promoting success-ful reproduction; and (4) culture is integrated, mean-ing that the traits that make up a particular culturalare internally consistent with one another.

Nevertheless, anthropologists differ greatly in howthey might refine their own definition of the cultureconcept. Anthropologists also differ in how theyapproach the study of culture. Some anthropologistsbegin with the observation that since culture is anabstraction that exists only in the minds of people ina particular society, which we cannot directly observe,culture must be studied through human behavior,which we can observe. Such an approach is oftentermed an objective, empiricist, or scientific approachand sometimes called an etic perspective. By etic,anthropologists mean that our understanding ofculture is based upon the perspective of the observer,not those who are actually being studied.

Other anthropologists, while recognizing thatculture is an abstraction and is difficult to measure,nevertheless hold that a worthy goal of anthropologistsis to understand the structure of ideas and meaningsas they exist in the minds of members of a particularculture. Such an approach is often labeled subjective,rationalist, or humanistic, and sometimes called anemic approach. By emic, anthropologists mean that thecentral goal of the anthropologist is to understand howculture is lived and experienced by its members.

Although these two approaches have quite differentemphases, cultural anthropologists have traditionallyrecognized the importance of both styles of investiga-tion as critical to the study of culture, although mostanthropologists work only within one style.

How Cultural AnthropologyDiffers From Sociology

In many colleges and universities in the United States,sociology and anthropology are included under thesame umbrella and exist as joint departments. Thisunion is not without justification, as cultural anthro-pology and sociology share a similar theoretical andphilosophical ancestry. In what ways is culturalanthropology different?

Cultural anthropology is unique because its historyas a discipline lies in a focus on exploration of the“Other.” That is, the anthropologists of the 19th cen-tury took a keen interest in the lives and customs of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, CULTURAL 151

people not descended from Europeans. The firstanthropologists, E. B. Tylor and Sir James Frazeramong them, relied mostly on the reports of explor-ers, missionaries, traders, and colonial officials andare commonly known as “armchair anthropologists.”It was not long, however, before travel around theglobe to directly engage in the investigation of otherhuman societies became the norm. The developmentof cultural anthropology is directly tied to the colo-nial era of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

The late 19th century was an era in which evolu-tionary theory dominated the nascent social sciences.The armchair anthropologists of the period were notimmune from the dominant paradigm, and evenscholars like Lewis Henry Morgan, who workedextensively and directly with American Indians,developed complicated typologies of cultural evolu-tion, grading known cultures according to their tech-nological accomplishments and the sophistication oftheir material culture. As is to be expected, Europeanswere invariably civilized, with others categorized asbeing somewhat or extremely primitive in compari-son. It was only as anthropologists began to investi-gate the presumably primitive societies that wereknown only through hearsay or incomplete reportsthat it was realized that such typologies were wildlyinaccurate.

In the United States, the development of anthro-pology as a field-based discipline was driven largelyby westward expansion. An important part of west-ward expansion was the pacification and extermina-tion of the indigenous Native American cultures thatonce dominated the continent. By the late 1870s, theBureau of American Ethnology was sponsoring tripsby trained scholars, charged with recording the life-ways of American Indian tribes that were believed tobe on the verge of extinction. This “salvage ethnol-ogy” formed the basis of American anthropology andled to important works such as James Mooney’s GhostDance Religion and the Sioux Outbreak of 1890, pub-lished in 1896, and Edward Nelson’s The Eskimo aboutBering Strait, published in 1899.

In Britain, some of the earliest investigations ofaboriginal peoples were conducted by W. H. R. Rivers,C. G. Seligmann, Alfred Haddon, and John Meyers,members of the 1898 expedition to the Torres Straits.The expedition was a voyage of exploration on behalfof the British government, and for the anthropolo-gists it was an opportunity to document the lives ofthe indigenous peoples of the region. This work later

inspired Rivers to return to the Torres Straits in 1901to 1902 to conduct more extensive fieldwork with theToda. By the 1920s, scientific expeditions to remotecorners of the world to document the cultures of theinhabitants, geology, and ecology of the region werecommonplace. Many of these expeditions, such asthe Steffansson-Anderson Canadian Arctic Expeditionof 1913 to 1918, have since proven invaluable, as theyrecorded the cultures of people only recently in con-tact with the European societies that would foreveralter them.

Cultural anthropology, therefore, has its roots as acolonial enterprise, one of specializing in the study ofsmall-scale, simple, “primitive” societies. This is, how-ever, not an accurate description of contemporarycultural anthropology. Many anthropologists todaywork within complex societies. But the anthropologyof complex societies is still much different than soci-ology. The history of working within small-scale,isolated cultural settings also led to the developmentof a particular methodology that is unique to culturalanthropology.

The fieldwork experiences of anthropologists ofthe late 19th and early 20th centuries were critical forthe development of anthropology as a rigorous, scien-tific discipline. How does an outsider accuratelydescribe cultural practices and an understanding ofthe significance of those practices for members of theculture studied? Achieving these goals meant livingwith and participating in the lives of the people in thestudy culture. It is this balance between careful obser-vation and participation in the lives of a group ofpeople that has become the cornerstone of moderncultural anthropology.

Called participant observation, the method is themeans by which most of an anthropologist’s informa-tion about a society is obtained. Anthropologistsoften use other methods of data collection, but par-ticipant observation is the sole means by whichanthropologists can generate both emic and eticunderstandings of a culture.

There are, however, no straightforward guidelinesabout how one actually goes about doing participantobservation. Cultural settings, personal idiosyn-crasies, and personality characteristics all ensure thatfieldwork and participant observation are uniqueexperiences. All anthropologists agree that fieldworkis an intellectually and emotionally demanding exer-cise, especially considering that fieldwork tradition-ally lasts for a year, and often longer. Participant

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


observation is also fraught with problems. Findingthe balance between detached observation andengaged participation can be extremely difficult. Howdoes one balance the two at the funeral of a personwho is both key informant and friend, for example?For these reasons, the fieldwork experience is anintense rite of passage for anthropologists starting outin the discipline. Not surprisingly, the intense natureof the fieldwork experience has generated a largeliterature about the nature of fieldwork itself.

Part of the reason for lengthy fieldwork stays wasdue to a number of factors, including the difficulty ofreaching a field site and the need to acquire compe-tence in the local language. However, as it has becomepossible to travel to the remotest corners of the globewith relative ease, and as anthropologists pursueopportunities to study obscure languages increasinglytaught in large universities, and as it is more difficultto secure research funding, field experiences havegenerally become shorter. Some anthropologists haveabandoned traditional participant observation infavor of highly focused research problems andarchival research, made possible especially in areaswhere significant “traditional” ethnographic field-work has been done.

A second research strategy that separates culturalanthropology from other disciplines is holism. Holismis the search for systematic relationships betweentwo or more phenomena. One of the advantages oflengthy periods of fieldwork and participant observa-tion is that the anthropologist can begin to see inter-relationships between different aspects of culture.One example might be the discovery of a relationshipbetween ecological conditions, subsistence patterns,and social organization. The holistic approach allowsfor the documentation of systematic relationshipsbetween these variables, thus allowing for the even-tual unraveling of the importance of various relation-ships within the system, and, ultimately, toward anunderstanding of general principles and the con-struction of theory.

In practical terms, holism also refers to a kind ofmultifaceted approach to the study of culture. Anthro-pologists working in a specific cultural setting typi-cally acquire information about topics not necessarilyof immediate importance, or even interest, for theresearch project at hand. Nevertheless, anthropolo-gists, when describing the culture they are workingwith, will often include discussions of culture history,linguistics, political and economic systems, settlement

patterns, and religious ideology. Just as anthropologistsbecome proficient at balancing emic and etic appro-aches in their work, they also become experts abouta particular theoretical problem, for which the cul-ture provides a good testing ground, and they becomeexperts about the cultural area, having been immersedin the politics, history, and social science of theregion itself.

Research Traditionsin Cultural Anthropology

Early Evolutionism

As noted above, anthropology as a disciplineemerged in conjunction with the European andAmerican colonial enterprise. Anthropology alsoemerged during a century in which ideas about bio-logical and human evolution emerged and eventuallydominated intellectual discourse.

Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace areperhaps the best known of the evolutionists of theperiod, but it was the British academic Herbert Spencerwho introduced evolutionary thinking to the studyof human society. Spencer, in fact, was publishingon some of these ideas even before Darwin’s On theOrigin of Species was published. Spencer, like otherevolutionists, advocated the application of evolution-ary principles to the study of humans—and went sofar as to use the biological understanding of organ-isms as a metaphor for the study of human society.And Spencer clearly saw the advantage of a syntheticapproach in understanding humanity’s past as a meansof understanding what humanity’s future might be.

To modern anthropologists, Spencer is mostclosely equated with the terms “survival of the fittest,”which he coined, and “social Darwinism.” Over thecourse of years, these terms have become associatedwith the justification of classist and racist socialpolicy, and it is for these associations that he is oftenregarded with either amusement or alarm: amuse-ment, because (albeit with hindsight) of the obvi-ously simplistic understanding of both evolutionarytheory and human culture, and alarm, because ofthe chilling implications of pursuing policies basedon such understandings.

Perhaps ironically, Spencer’s influence on anthro-pology has been more profound in arenas other thanevolutionism. Spencer’s writings, in fact, are moresimilar to the writings of the structural functionalists

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


of the early and mid-20th century than they are toother evolutionists. It was Spencer who first coinedterms like “superorganic” as a reference to culture(the culture concept had not yet been formulated),and it was Spencer who first used terms like structure,function, and system in reference to the “superorganic.”The metaphor of culture as organism is certainlycommon to both functionalism and Spencer.

Spencer’s thinking about evolution and humansociety was, however, armchair anthropology. His pri-mary treatment of anthropological material, Principlesof Sociology, published between 1877 and 1896, wascompiled through the efforts of a research staff thatworked from documentary sources, not firsthandexperience.

In this sense, the other famed evolutionist of thelate 19th century, Lewis Henry Morgan, was the com-plete opposite, as Morgan’s contribution to anthro-pology was based on direct experience. Morgan ismost commonly associated with work with the SenecaNation: his legal efforts to defend the Seneca frompredatory government policy, his subsequent adop-tion by the tribe in 1847, and, in 1851, the publicationof League of the Iroquois. Beyond his association withSeneca, though, Morgan made visits to over 60 differ-ent Indian tribes in the United States and Canada.

Morgan’s most important contribution to anthro-pology, however, is Ancient Society, his treatise oncultural evolution, published in 1877. In this work,Morgan presented an evolutionary sequence throughwhich all human societies either had or, presumably,could progress, beginning with several differentforms of “Savagery” and proceeding through all ofthe steps of the sequence to “Civilization,” the apex ofcultural evolution.

What is important about Morgan’s scheme, nowreferred to as “unilineal evolution,” is not that it was anaccurate representation of reality, for it wasn’t. Rather,the lasting influence of Ancient Society is that Morganidentified stages as corresponding to specific techno-logical capabilities and material possessions, which, inturn, were accompanied by particular social forms,like subsistence strategies or forms of social organiza-tion. In addition, Morgan recognized that the dis-covery of new technologies and changes to materialculture would necessitate the development of newsocial traits to accommodate those material changes.

Like Spencer, the misuse of Morgan’s ideas, and thewildly inaccurate or nonexistent nature of anthropo-logical data available for testing those ideas, meant

that the reaction against unilineal evolution was swiftand complete. By 1900, evolutionary perspectives hadvanished from the discipline. It wasn’t until the 1930sthat anthropologists like Leslie White and JulianSteward began thinking about evolutionary issues,and it wasn’t until the 1950s that the discipline againembraced the idea.

Also like Spencer, Morgan was an important figurefor other reasons, not the least of which was his influ-ence on dialectical materialism. Morgan’s materialistapproach, the desire to understand society throughtechnology and subsistence, likewise inspired impor-tant figures of 20th century anthropology, among themLeslie White, V. Gordon Childe, and Marvin Harris.

Historical Particularism

The anthropology of Lewis Henry Morgan andothers of the mid- to late 18th century was largelyregarded as a hobby. That is, anthropology wasviewed as an appropriate pastime for men of meansand gentlemen of leisure. This gentlemanly pursuitcertainly characterized the armchair approach ofanthropologists like E. B. Tylor and others. Andbecause anthropology was a hobby, it existed largelyoutside the bounds of the academy.

Franz Boas was responsible for moving anthropol-ogy away from a leisure pursuit to a full-time acade-mic endeavor. A German immigrant to the UnitedStates, Boas was trained as a geographer, havingwritten his dissertation about the color of seawater.In 1883, he traveled to Baffin Island, in the EasternCanadian Arctic, to further these studies. Fortunatelyfor anthropology, Boas found the local Eskimos muchmore interesting, and he subsequently shifted hisstudies to that of the customs of the Central Eskimo.His experience impressed upon him the importanceof lengthy, highly detailed data collection in the fieldas critical to undertaking good ethnology, and hequickly realized how a limited understanding ofanother culture is begging the observer to misinter-pret that data based on the observer’s inherent biases.

In 1888, Boas founded the Department of Anthro-pology at Clark University, but he quickly moved toColumbia University, the institution with which he ismost closely associated and from which he trainednumerous students and established an Americananthropology.

Boas’s main contributions to the discipline stemmedfrom his rejection of unilineal evolution and the com-parative method with which it was associated. Boas

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


and his students argued that the comparative methodwas problematic on two fronts. The biggest problemwas that comparisons between cultures were based ontoo little data. Boas recognized that all primitive cul-tures have their own unique and particular histories,and he accused the evolutionists of equating contem-porary primitives with our prehistoric ancestors,pointing out that contemporary primitives have beenevolving too, which makes them very different fromany prehistoric human. Further compounding theproblem is that because there are so little extant data,how is it possible to compare two cultures if we do notknow the circumstances under which those featuresarrived and developed in each society?

Second, Boas also felt that the value judgmentsassociated with the various evolutionary schemes laidout by Morgan and others hindered our ability tounderstand cultural evolution at all. Boas argued thatevolutionary schemes were full of implicit assump-tions that certain stages, like “Civilization,” wereinherently better than stages like “Barbarism,” butthere was no objective means of making that assess-ment. For Boas, cultures must be understood on theirown terms, not in relation to others.

This last point is a close approximation of culturalrelativism, the notion that no culture is inherentlysuperior to any other culture. All cultures are equaland comparable, and value judgments about culturaltraits must be made only after understanding thecontext in which those traits occur.

Beyond the first formulation of cultural relativism,though, Boas is known for the development of hisunique, holistic approach to cultural anthropology.As a means of combating loose speculation aboutculture, he advocated the meticulous collection ofdata through extensive fieldwork, arguing that theo-rizing and generalizing could be done only after theaccumulation of detailed knowledge about a culture’shistory, its inventory of cultural traits, and its rela-tionships with neighboring societies. This inductiveapproach has since been called “historical particular-ism,” and it was the dominant approach in Americananthropology until 1950.

Functionalism

Beginning in about 1910, British anthropologybegan to reject the evolutionary approach. The newparadigm, called “functionalism,” eschewed theexamination of cultures through the investigationof how cultural traits evolved (for evolutionists) or

developed (for particularists). Instead, functionalistswere concerned not with discrete traits but ratherwith social “institutions” and how these operatedwithin bounded societies.

The functionalists relied on a concept of culturethat was based on Spencer’s concept of the super-organism. For functionalists, culture was believed tooperate in much the same way that the human bodyfunctioned. Individual institutions, like social organi-zation, religion, or economy, were like the organsof the body, working together to create somethinggreater than the sum of their parts. This metaphor isso appealing that it has come to dominate the waythat many anthropologists teach cultural anthropol-ogy. Almost all introductory textbooks in culturalanthropology, for example, begin with an explanationof the culture concept and the unique methodologyand approach of cultural anthropology, followed bychapters that examine specific cultural institutions:environment, subsistence, and economic anthropol-ogy; kinship, marriage, and social organization; reli-gion, the arts, and expressive culture; and appliedanthropology and cultural survival.

British functionalism is known mostly throughtwo actors, Bronislaw Malinowski and A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, both of whom are credited as the founders offunctionalism in anthropology. Malinowski was bornin Poland but enrolled in the graduate program inanthropology at the London School of Economics in1910. In 1914, he began fieldwork in New Guinea,finally settling on working in the Trobriand Islands in1915. While in the field, World War I broke out, andbecause he was a subject of the Austro-HungarianEmpire, he faced the possibility of incarceration.Luckily for him, British officials bent the rules andallowed him to continue his fieldwork.

His lengthy stay in the Torbriand Islands allowedhim to formulate the method of participant observa-tion, the method that is now the standard method ofall anthropological fieldwork. He learned the lan-guage, recorded reams of data, and participated in thelives of the Trobrianders with whom he was living.

For Malinowski, work with the Trobriands waslargely focused on how particular cultural institutionsfunctioned to maintain individual psychology andprovide coping strategies for dealing with stressfulevents. So, for example, the primary function of magic,ritual, and religious belief was to promote individualwell-being in uncertain situations. Malinowski’s dis-cussion of the differences between magic use by

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


lagoon fisherman (whohardly resorted to magic atall) and open-ocean fisher-man and long-distancevoyagers (who relied heav-ily on magic to ensure suc-cess) is a classic example.Differences in magic usewere clearly based on thedifferences between locales.Inshore, lagoon fishing wasviewed as a safe and pro-ductive activity, whereasvoyaging-fishing in unpro-tected waters was extremelyrisky and unpredictable.Magic, then, provided asense of control in uncer-tain situations.

R. Radcliffe-Brown wastrained at roughly the sametime as Malinowski, conducting his field research inthe Andaman Islands from 1906 to 1908, and then inAustralia from 1910 to 1912. It was during his rewriteof his Andaman Islands fieldwork that he began toread the French sociologists Marcel Mauss and EmileDurkheim, and from these influences was born hisown version of functionalism, called “structural func-tionalism.” For Radcliffe-Brown, the individual wasof almost no account. Social institutions were ofprimary interest: What is the relationship betweensocial structure and social activity? In this sense, theconcerns of Radcliffe-Brown and other structuralfunctionalists centered around the ways in whichsocial institutions functioned to maintain society asa whole.

Structural and Symbolic Anthropology

Radcliffe-Brown’s version of functionalism wasquite at odds with Malinowski’s. Whereas Malinowskiwas more concerned with how social institutionsserved individual psychological and even biologicalneeds, Radcliffe-Brown was more interested inunderstanding how cultural institutions workedtogether to satisfy the mechanical needs of society.For Radcliffe-Brown, society was best characterized asa system of institutions that exists independently ofthe individuals who comprise the system.

As noted above, structural functionalism, then,takes its intellectual cues more directly from the

writings of Emile Durkheim and Marcel Mauss,French sociologists whose primary interests were, toparaphrase Edmund Leach, in the realm of “thingssaid,” the world of ideas, rather than with “things done,”as Malinowski’s were, and indeed most Americananthropology. The British functionalists, however,still employed the concept of the biological organismas the metaphor for culture. It was Claude Levi-Strausswho altered the meaning of “structure,” as employedby Radcliffe-Brown, by replacing the metaphor. ForLevi-Strauss, language was the best metaphor forunderstanding culture.

Levi-Strauss’s entrée into professional anthropol-ogy began in 1934, when he took a position in thesociology department at the University of Sao Paolo,Brazil. The position provided an opportunity totravel into the Brazilian interior, where he conductedfieldwork for the first time. The experience had alasting effect on him, for, having been trained in law,he was expecting to find individual social facts andinstead discovered genuine human beings who livedquite sophisticated mental lives.

Levi-Strauss remained in Sao Paolo until 1938,returned to Europe to serve a year in military service,and after the occupation, took a position at the NewSchool in New York. It was there that he first met thelinguist Roman Jakobsen, who introduced Levi-Strauss to structural linguistics. It was from this intel-lectual crossbreeding that Levi-Strauss developed his

Andaman Islanders

Source: Courtesy of the Society for Andaman and Nicobar Ecology.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


version of structuralism, sometimes called “structuralanthropology” but more commonly known as“French structuralism.”

In using a linguistic metaphor for understandingculture, Levi-Strauss was arguing that culture is akind of language. Like language, culture is a series ofrules that govern behavior and transmit messages toothers. A commonly used example is that of break-fast. When we wake in the morning and are hungry,we reference deeply embedded cultural rules aboutwhat kinds of foods are appropriate for breakfast,how they may be prepared and consumed, and whatmeanings those foods carry, what they “say” about themeal itself, and what meanings they transmit toothers observing the meal.

Human culture is therefore like language in thesense that all human cultures satisfy the same basicneeds, like eating or reproducing, but they do so indifferent ways. For the structuralists, what is actuallyconsumed at breakfast is, by itself, not very interest-ing, unless what is done at breakfast is contrasted withwhat is done at lunchtime and dinnertime. It isthrough the patterns as revealed through the con-trasts that we begin to understand the grammaticalrules of eating. Of even more interest is the attempt totease out how the grammar of eating is similar to, say,the grammar of reproducing. “What is done,” for thestructuralist, is akin to the surface structure of a lan-guage, the actual utterances; the real interest is in thepatterns and rules that lie under the surface structure,the “deep structure” of culture.

Levi-Strauss and his followers often used themetaphor of the orchestra to explain how the struc-turalist sets about the task of decoding cultural mean-ings. In a musical score, separate instruments havedistinct musical parts. The “message” of the sym-phony makes sense only when the parts are acting inunison. In addition, just as the symphony carriesmeaning in a left-to-right, melodic sequence, as theinstruments play their parts from beginning to end,so does the musical score carry meaning at any givenmoment within the symphony, as the instrumentsoperate in harmonic unison.

The metaphor of the orchestra sets up an opposi-tion between syntagmatic and paradigmatic chainsof meaning. For Levi-Strauss, the nature of the dif-ferences between the two, the former as associationby contiguity and sequence, the latter as associationby metaphoric analogy, underscores an underlyingbinary nature of the human brain.

For most anthropologists, the application of binaryoppositions to the study of myth is Levi-Strauss’sprimary contribution to cultural anthropology. Buthis real contribution was the development of a newapproach to anthropology that began to focus moreextensively on uncovering meaning, an importantattempt to approach culture emically rather thanetically.

Despite this shift away from an objective approachto the study of culture, structuralism was criticizedfor focusing on meaning as generated through theexamination of contrasts between aspects of cultureand not through meaning as derived from the formsof the symbols themselves. Structuralists were alsoaccused of placing undue emphasis upon actionsrather than on the people performing those actions.

This different take on the examination of ideas incultural anthropology has been labeled as symbolic orinterpretive anthropology, and it has two main propo-nents, Clifford Geertz and Victor Turner.

Geertz is most often associated with interpretiveanthropology. He believed that the key to under-standing cultural meaning was through the examina-tion of symbols, which he thought were the directexpression of worldview and ethos. For Geertz, cul-ture wasn’t necessarily simply locked away insidepeople’s heads, but was most clearly expressed in thesymbolic life of a group of people.

Victor Turner, most closely associated with sym-bolic anthropology, was more interested in process andthe ways in which symbolism worked as an operator inthat process. For Turner, like Geertz, symbols expressshared meanings, but, unlike Geertz, they do so in waysthat additionally serve to promote group solidarity.Turner’s key concept was that of the social drama, aspontaneous unit of social process that occurs regu-larly in social life. Composed of four stages, the socialdrama is a sequence: The social fabric is ruptured, sub-sequently creates a crisis, and is resolved through theuse of ritual to either reestablish or reformulate socialrelations. For Turner, the emphasis was on understand-ing how symbolism worked as a vehicle for expressingshared meanings, resolving conflict, promoting groupsolidarity, and recognizing changing social statuses.

Some cultural anthropologists would object to hav-ing interpretive and symbolic anthropology lumpedtogether so, but the approaches of Geertz and Turnerare important for understanding cultural anthropol-ogy because they both managed to turn culturalanthropology away from the “grand theory” traditions

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, ECONOMIC 157

of functionalism, materialism, and structuralism andtoward a focus on cultures and how anthropologistscan best interpret them. Furthermore, these anthro-pologists, Geertz especially, were influenced by schol-ars traditionally seen as existing outside of the boundsof anthropological scholarship. Cultural anthropologyowes many of its intellectual roots to “nonanthropolo-gists” like Spencer, Marx, Durkheim, and Freud, ofcourse, but the interpretive and symbolic approacheswere influenced by philosophers like Heidegger,Ricouer, and Wittgenstein.

The symbolic and interpretive approaches havebeen criticized by other anthropologists for beingmore literary criticism than anthropology, whichunderscores a growing debate in the subdiscipline:Is cultural anthropology a science or a humanity?The issue is critical: Geertz and other interpretiveanthropologists were criticized because their researchwas impossible to replicate, making it difficult toverify whether a subjective symbolic interpretationof cultural behavior is an accurate representation ofreality as it exists on the ground.

For the symbolic anthropologists, of course, thatwas precisely their point. A scientific approach in cul-tural anthropology, such as cultural ecology, missesthe entire basis of a focus on emics. Since culturedominates all modes of human behavior, the symbolicapproach is critical for our understanding of what cul-ture is. The symbolic anthropologists also argued thatjust as Boas had hinted nearly a century before, thefieldwork experience is highly subjective, and the indi-vidual fieldworker must be careful that their owninherent cultural biases do not overwhelm the record-ing and interpretation of anthropological data.

This last point was seized upon by cultural anthro-pologists working under the influence of postmod-ernism, an eclectic movement that has its origins inphilosophy but has become established in contempo-rary cultural anthropology. The postmodern per-spective adopted by many cultural anthropologistsquestions whether we can accurately capture a cul-tural reality. For one thing, ethnographers engagingin fieldwork, by their mere presence, alter the culturalsetting in which they are working. Second, the ethno-grapher’s own conception of reality inherently colorsthe reconstruction of the culture when it is presentedas ethnography.

The solution to this problem and the future ofcultural anthropology are unclear. Some culturalanthropologists now see themselves not so much as

anthropologists, but as practitioners of cultural studies.Others see themselves as a kind of literary critic, withthe “text” being a particular society. Still others haverejected this criticism outright, observing that post-modernist perspectives, taken to their extreme, areboth paralytic and detached from a reality that is pos-itively observable, even if there remain some seriousmethodological concerns that cultural anthropolo-gists must consider when engaging in fieldwork.

— Peter Collings

See also Anthropology, Characteristics of; Anthropology,History of; Anthropology, Subdivisions of; Boas, Franz;Frazer, Sir James; Functionalism; Malinowski, Bronislaw;Radcliffe-Brown, A. R.; Spencer, Herbert; Tylor, EdwardBurnett

Further Readings

Boas, F. (1940). Race, language, and culture. New York:Free Press.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures.New York: Basic Books.

Leach, E. (1973). Structuralism is social anthropology.In D. Robey (Ed.), Structuralism: An introduction(pp. 37–57). London: William Clowes.

Levi-Strauss, C. (1974). Structural anthropology, Vol. I.(C. Jacobsen & B. G. Schoepf, Trans.). New York:Basic Books.

Malinowksi, B. (1994). Argonauts of the WesternPacific. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

Marcus, G. E., & Fischer, M. J. (1986). Anthropology ascultural critique: an Experimental moment in thehuman sciences. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.

Morgan, L. H. (1994). Ancient society. Tucson:University of Arizona Press.

Radcliffe-Brown, A. R. (1952). Structure and functionin primitive societies. New York: Free Press.

Turner, V. (1974). Dramas, fields, and metaphors:Symbolic action in human society. Ithaca, NY:Cornell University Press.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, ECONOMIC

Economic anthropology includes the examination ofthe economic relationships found among precapital-ist societies (nonmarket economies); this includes

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, ECONOMIC158

band, village, and peasant societies. Economicanthropologists study the historical incorporationinto the world market economy (capitalism) or statesocialist economies of tribal peoples and peasantsocieties.

Formal Economics

Cross-disciplinary studies are both an admirable anda desired pursuit. Formal economics is designed tostudy the psychology of marginal utility, scarcity,price theory, economizing rationality, entrepreneurialskills, and buying and selling in a market economy.The question remains: To what degree are its conceptsrelevant to most of the economic history of the world,in which market either plays a minor role or no roleat all in the everyday lives of the people? Formal eco-nomics uses individual behavior as its methodologyto answer this question.

Cost under capitalism includes labor. Cost to apeasant farm is that drudgery is the major cost. In aneconomic slump, capitalists cut back on wage labor.A peasant farm must increase labor to maintain thestandard of living. Cultural values are important indefining the standard of living, making drudgeryany work not necessary in achieving that standardof living.

Chayanov in Today’s Anthropology

Chayonov was a Russian agricultural economist whoworked under both the Czars and the Bolsheviks.After he was arrested and killed by Stalin, his workswere banned. When his writings were rediscovered in1965, he became a major influence on American eco-nomic anthropology. Formal economics cannot workas a historical model because it assumes a stabilityof preferences. This change comes over time; formaleconomics as a theory is nonhistorical or at best has avery short historical scope. Formal economics theorylacks sociology, and thus is useless in explaininghistorical changes, such as changes in political domi-nation, ideology, or culture.

The relationship between a capitalist world econ-omy and local economies in which noncapitalistsocial relations prevail requires an understanding ofthe interaction between these noncapitalist socialrelations and a dominant capitalist economy. Purelyeconomic categories cannot be used when studyingthis interaction. Much of the everyday life of any

traditional people, even under capitalist domination,is based upon the nonwage family economic unit. Thehousehold economy lies outside the framework of aneconomic theory designed for studying capitalism.The key to understanding economic life in a fullydeveloped capitalist economy is profitability basedupon wage labor.

Without wage labor, there is no longer a purelycapitalist economy. The domination of a larger capi-talist economy clearly exists, but noncapitalist socialrelations alter its local details. Much of the economicactivity is locally determined by the requirementof satisfying family needs. In a household economy,the family is both a production and consumptionunit. Each economic activity meets specific familyneeds. Without wages, profit maximization is not theprimary concern. Family economy moves towardequilibrium between two major factors: familydemand satisfaction and the drudgery of the work.The primary economic decisions center aroundfamily needs.

Every economic system must equip labor powerwith a means of production. There is the possibilityof increasing productivity, when the need arises,with increasing labor exertion, increasing division oflabor, and alternative sources of income. Productivity,for the family, centers between an upper and a lowerlimit. The upper limit is the amount of work, whichmaximizes family labor to achieve family consumerexpectation.

If families work to meet family demands and notfor the profit of a capitalist employer, and if theconditions of life are not too harsh, the intensity oflabor will remain below what it would be if familylabor were fully utilized.

Polanyi, George Dalton,and the Substantivist Economists

The substantivists, using both economic history andanthropological data, openly dispute the theoreticalrelevance of formal concepts like “marginal utility”outside of a narrow historical view of industrial capi-talism. Polanyi was the economic historian wholaunched the substantivist rebellion.

Polanyi claimed economic relationships are embed-ded in other social institutions of a society. Even theforced integration of isolated communities into aworld market economy happens in a historical con-text of economic systems already established and

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


operating to various degrees on principles other than“free trade.”

The differences between the various traditionaleconomies require the researcher to abandon the useof economic categories developed to study industrialcapitalism. Studying any economic system requires atruly holistic approach.

The substantivist uses empirical data rather thangrand theory to create categories to study a specificeconomy. In the “real world,” there are various types ofinteraction between household economy, communityreciprocity, and redistribution or exchange to makeeach economic system culturally and historically spe-cific. This requires the researcher to use particularconceptual categories when studying nonmarketeconomies.

Formal economics focuses on economic behaviorand individual psychology in a market setting. Formaleconomics begins with choices of individuals actingas economic agents. Production, distribution, and con-sumption are considered as connected to calculationsof costs versus benefits. Even under a fully developedcapitalist system, many decisions are imposed byexternal concerns dictated by the effects of a marketeconomy and not a matter of personal choice.

In most nonmarket economies, economic behav-iors are based upon specific rules governing produc-tion and distribution. Social obligations, ecology,and technology determine the rules of the economy.In these economies, choice is not an obvious issue.These restrictions are firmly set by custom, socialobligations, ecology, and technology. Choice as cen-tral to consumer-based capitalism is a minor part of aperipheral market, if it exists at all.

Within the economic setting, people share a com-mon social identity and culture. The rules governingan economic course of action are required for survival.

The economy is expressed in kinship, religious, orpolitical terms. There is generalized social controlover production and subsistence. Access to land,labor, and emergency assistance is controlled by rulesand is outside of purely market considerations.Economic systems are the structured transactions andrules of action overseeing production and distributionof goods and services in a reliable style. Within thecommunity, access to land and other resources, divisionof labor, production goals, and types of technologyused are guided by culturally specific rules. In tradi-tional societies, the economy is not a separate institu-tion. Traditionally, allocation of labor, organization

of work, and distribution of goods and services areexpressions of political, religious, or kinship obliga-tions being defined as the moral responsibilities ofgroup members.

Market economy is an economic system that isself-regulated by market prices and production forprofit. Until modern times, markets, where they didexist, were a secondary part of the overall economy.Even local markets were peripheral to subsistence.

Social relations in any community are more centralthan profit to the economic concerns of the people.The economy everywhere is primarily submerged inthe social relations of that society. Economic activityis motivated for the most part by concerns for socialresponsibility, social prestige, and social security. Intribal and peasant societies, the economy remains anadjunct of the sociology of the community. Productionis not for profit in the majority of economic activity,and the distribution within society never reflectswealth for wealth’s sake. Social interest of the wholemust be used to justify the economy, includingsystems of production, distribution, or exchange. Allsocial relations within the economic system reflect aperson’s moral position within the community. Socialties are social security. Social obligations are reciprocalin both the material and the moral concerns of all andaffect each individual of the community. Economicself-interests threaten the community and the individ-uals within the community by undermining the col-lective identity and solidarity of the community.

In all peasant societies, there is a marketplace and amarket day. Within peasant society, self-sufficiency isthe major economic philosophy of the households.This is and must be supplemented by a symmetricalpattern of social organization called “reciprocity,”centralization of redistribution, and a marketplaceseparated in time and space and importance from therest of the economy. Without a market economy,barter can take only a secondary role in the overalleconomy. Within a market economy, both reciprocityand redistribution continue to exist in supplementaryroles. The self-sufficiency of the household is alsoan institutionalized philosophy within a capitalistsociety and yet is very dependent on the market econ-omy, with its necessity to sell labor power for a wageto support the household.

Before the market economy is established, theeconomy is only a minor part of the equilibrium of alarger sociological arrangement. Only a market econ-omy makes production for economic gain a major

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


motive for economic activity. The market economyis based upon the historically specific philosophy ofproduction for profit that creates the institution of amarket freed from the market place. The universalmarket makes all other institutions subordinate,reversing the sociological relationship found betweenthe economy and the rest of society in traditionalsocieties. Instead of the economy being embedded inother social relations, all other social relations arenow embedded in the economy of the market. Oncethe economy becomes separate from its sociologicalconstraints, the rest of the society becomes reshapedto meet the needs of the economy.

Market exchanges developed to the degree wheregoods are bought and sold with money. Because eachside wants to gain the advantage, economic exchangemust become free of any and all social obligations.Money becomes all-purpose.

All-purpose money now replaces special purposemoney. The laws of supply and demand set prices andnot any other social agreements as before. All goodsand services have a monetary price. Most people nowmake a living by selling something on the market.People who have no other resources sell their laborpower for wages, because these workers do not havetheir own capital goods or raw materials to produce thegoods sold. With a market economy, land, labor, andcapital are all bought and sold. The economy followsno law other than the laws of supply and demand, thusit becomes self-regulating. The natural economy isfounded upon the survival of the group. The individ-ual’s economic activity is to support social standingwithin the community. Because in all noncapitalisteconomies, the economy is integrated into noneco-nomic social concerns, the health and well being of thecommunity and all its members take precedence overthe personal economic gain of the individual.

Every step in the production process must meetsome social claim to other members of the commu-nity. These social claims are the basis of the economicphilosophy and the motivations around which peopleorganize their labor. All social obligations are recipro-cal in the long run. Within this system, economic self-interest is incomprehensible. Generosity and socialprestige are very closely linked. Traditionally, theeconomy is immersed in other, more important socialrelations, and most people are concerned with largerissues in the community if they are to maintain theirsocial standing. In times of extreme need, a welfaresystem is put in place. This welfare is always cloaked

in terms other than economic aid. The maintenanceof social ties is framed in terms of kinship concerns,religious obligation, and honor. All social obligationis reciprocal. There is always social pressure to elimi-nate open economic self-interest. Reciprocity protectsthe family, governing both the production and distri-bution needs. Sharing within the family goes withoutsaying, but sharing with other closely related familiesis the benefactors’ own social security.

Redistribution needs a broker of some sort who is adistinguished individual that others in the grouptrust; this individual receives, stores, and distributesthe supplies as needed. The economy behind this sys-tem of storage and distribution is socially definedoutside of any purely economic motives. The motiva-tion is not defined as wealth in material affluence.Sharing and mutuality of reciprocity is further sup-plemented by the welfare of redistribution with anyeconomic system of record keeping for the overallestimated expenditures. Through a social organiza-tion of unity and incorporation of all into a largersocial entity with economic motives of cost versusbenefits, material gain need not play an important rolein the daily operations of the society. Interdependencebetween the exploited and the exploiter is a socialarrangement based upon a moral and not an economicexplanation of the relationship in peasant society.

Before capitalism of the free-market type, stratifica-tion was explained as a mutual relationship ordainedby honor and obligation and was the noneconomicorganization of redistribution. The approach is that alleconomic systems before a market economy of capi-talism were some combination of a household econ-omy producing for use, reciprocity, or redistribution,with the market a very minor and carefully controlledaspect. Even in the mercantile economy of Europeafter 1500, markets were the main concern of govern-ment and were always carefully run by the govern-ment. Under mercantile capitalism, markets were tooimportant not to be strictly controlled. The notion ofa self-regulating market was not present.

The idea of a self-regulating economy controlledonly by market processes would have been a very dan-gerous thing to even think about in the medievalEuropean economy. The market was carefully regu-lated in all societies to either a very minor role or wasprevented from controlling the necessary subsistenceresources. The substantive environmental factor forsurvival remained under social control at all times.The economy was immersed in other social relations.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Production and distribution remained closely tied tothe larger social ethic. The preservation of the socialconnections was acute. There was compelling pres-sure on individuals to get rid of their own economicself-interest. With the coming of the IndustrialRevolution in the 1800s, tools of production weremarvelously improved.

The farmer buys land to produce crops to sell onthe market. Prices regulate themselves. The change toa market economy means a change in the psychologyof the people of the society from being concernedwith making a larger social obligation, social prestige,and social standing in the community to individualresponsibility, individual merit, and personal gainin material items. All transactions are turned intomoney transactions. Mass production requires thatthe market can be reasonably understood only if allthe factors going into production, like land, labor, andother needed resources, are sold on the market with-out any other social restrictions. The self-regulatingmarket controlled by market prices is the centralorganization of a market society.

Marxist Anthropology

Economic anthropology is constantly asking why cross-cultural similarities and differences have occurred,making formal economics too cumbersome to workwith beyond the most superficial level. Formal eco-nomics cannot work as a historical model becauseit assumes a stability of preferences. These changeover time; the classical theories of formal economicsare not historical, or at best have a very short histori-cal scope. The primary flaw is that this model assumesinstitutional patterns and hierarchies of values, andwhat is assumed cannot be explained.

Human needs and basic human nature are sociallyfabricated or transformed; human nature is also, at itscore, universal. Marxist anthropologists have come tobelieve that formal economic theory is next to uselessin explaining historical transformation from precapi-talist to capitalist economic systems, political domi-nation, state formation, ideological systems thatlegitimize exploitation, or how dominant beliefsevolve jointly with changes in economic social rela-tions of society. Over long periods of time, there areconflicts inherent within society, and because of theseconflicts, all societies are changing.

Property relations are social relations and assuch have socially defined rights. These rights are

distributed among groups and individuals, and atthe same time, these rights limit access to productiveresources.

A social system also interacts with other socialsystems. The result is that the environment of a socialsystem is altered because of the interaction betweenthese two social systems. Expansion of the marketeconomy of Europe until it consolidated the entireearth into an integrated world economy is such a case.The development of capitalism on a world scalebrings even the most remote people under the controlof a market economy, creating areas of relative wealthand other areas of increasing poverty.

Lenin’s theory at first looks at the older form ofcapitalism when free competition prevailed and theexport of manufactured goods was the core ofEurope’s economic relations with the less developedparts of the world. Then, Lenin examines moderncapitalism, when monopolies dominate and theexport of capital has become the typical feature.

According to Lenin, the competitive capitalism ofthe early 19th century became increasingly centralized(fewer competitive firms) and concentrated (largerfirms). This centralization was accomplished throughcombines (the grouping together of related or depen-dent industries), cartels (large firms cooperating inthe same industries and dividing up territories), andtrusts (many firms operating as a single firm).

Monopoly capitalism, when a few highly central-ized firms effectively dominate the economy, createsimperialism out of its own needs. To find continuedprofits in an already overly developed economy athome, investments flow to less developed areas of theworld where the capitalist economy has not reacheda saturation point, therefore making profits muchhigher. Export of capital is the fundamental princi-ple of imperialism. The export of capital greatly influ-ences and hastens the growth of capitalism in thosecountries to which it is exported. Monopoly capital-ism and imperialism are a stage of capitalism, whichreaches a point that is the beginning of a completeinternational socialization of production. Productionbecomes social, but the seizing of the profits remainsthe private property of the capitalists.

Luxemburg saw that capital had to be expandedoutward to survive, until the whole world wouldbecome a single capitalist system. Lenin saw imperial-ism as a necessity only under the conditions ofmonopoly capitalism; the Luxemburg model sharesthe point in common with the dependency theorists,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


that imperialism is as old as capitalism. According toLuxemburg, imperialism is the political manifestationof the accumulation of capital. The less developedparts of the world remain attractive sources of futureprofits, because accumulation in the earlier capitalistnations reached a point where profitable marketsbecame saturated, and capital must move into theless developed regions in order to take advantage ofgreater profits. This movement of capital helps speedup capitalist development in the less developed areas.With the expanded economic development of thecapitalist countries and their heightening of extremecompetition in gaining control over noncapitalistareas, imperialism increases in its tone of strife andsavageness. Capitalism grows both in its aggressiontoward the less developed areas of the world and in itscontinuous struggle among competing capitalistcountries. The more violently, ruthlessly, and thor-oughly imperialism brings about the disintegration ofnoncapitalist nations and peoples, the more speedily itundermines the very basis for capitalist accumulation.Imperialism is a major strategy for prolonging the lifeof international capitalism, but it also destroys thevery foundation of capitalism. Capitalism needs non-capitalist social structures as a market for its surplusvalue, as a reservoir of supply of raw materials for itsmeans of production, and as a source of labor powerfor its wage system. For each of these requirements,modes of production grounded in a natural economyare useless to capital. In all modes of productionwhere natural economy predominates, relations ofproduction are basically in reply to domestic necessityor production for use; therefore, there is very littledesire for foreign goods and even less local produc-tion for market exchange.

A natural economy resists the demands of capital-ism with uncompromising barriers. Capitalism mustconfront traditional modes of production with astruggle of subjugation, opposing any natural econ-omy that it meets. The cardinal process in these con-flicts remains political coercion. In Europe, there wererevolutions opposing feudalism; in the non-Europeannations, this capitalist development presupposes theformula of colonial policy.

The second condition of importance for acquiringmeans of production and realizing the surplus valueis that commodity exchange and the commodityeconomy become accustomed to economic activityin societies based on natural economy as soon as theirindependence have been abolished. In the course of

this disruptive process of coming under the control ofa world economy, natural economies become domi-nated by capitalism. Capital growth requires the abil-ity to buy the products of and sell its commodities toall noncapitalist strata and societies.

To Andre Gunder Frank, the problem is under-development, brought about by the export of capitalfrom the poor countries to the rich ones, whichallows for the economic overdevelopment of the richand the increasing economic underdevelopment ofthe poor. Underdevelopment is the inevitable out-come of over 400 years of capitalist expansion and ofthe inherent contradictions of capitalism itself. Thecapitalist system is separated into a metropolitan coreand peripheral satellites in the rest of the world. Thereis the perpetuation of the essential organization andinherent contradictions of the capitalist world econ-omy throughout the history of the development ofcapitalism and its exaggerated growth. Capitalism’scontinuity is due to the reproduction of these contra-dictions throughout the world in modern history.These capitalist contradictions and the historicaldevelopment of the capitalist system have given birthto underdevelopment in the peripheral satellites,whose economic surplus is expropriated and used toproduce economic development in the metropolitancenters, which appropriate that surplus.

The first contradiction is what is called “the expro-priation and appropriation of a poor country’s eco-nomic surplus.” This is an extension of Marx’s labortheory of value, in which the capitalist expropriatesthe surplus that is created by the worker.

The capitalist of the rich metropolitan centerexpropriates the surplus from the poor peripheralsatellite. In both Marx’s and Frank’s theories, theexpropriated surplus is saved by the capitalist andreinvested, increasing the power and the wealth of thecapitalist. Once established, this exploitative relationextends capitalist relations between the rest of theworld and metropolitan centers, with regional centersbeing an intermediate position. There are firmlyestablished international, national, and local capitalistrelations who produce economic development for asmall number at each level and underdevelopmentfor the masses.

Frank’s second contradiction is based uponMarx’s concept of the centralization of the capitalistsystem. Both are the necessary result of the contra-dictions that are central to the capitalist systemworldwide.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Development and underdevelopment are theproducts of a single dialectically contradictory eco-nomic system of capitalism. The same historical move-ment of the development of capitalism throughoutthe world has concurrently created both economicdevelopment and underdevelopment.

The third capitalist contradiction is based on themutual interrelationship of the first two contradic-tions throughout time. Once established, the capital-ist system continues to reproduce itself based uponexploitation, which is the process of expropriation ofeconomic surplus of the poor producers and theappropriation of this surplus by the owners of capital.Historically, what are created are the developed met-ropolitan centers and the underdeveloped peripheralsatellites. This creates a continuity that runs through-out the entire history of capitalism.

Dependency theory sees the world as a single capi-talist economy that has increasingly controlled theworld since 1500, when Europe began colonizing theAmericas and established direct trade routes toEastern Asia. The dependency theorists claim capi-talism is the production for profit maximization inthe world market. Capitalism, even though it is asystem of dependency, domination, and subordina-tion, is a system of full integration into a worldwidecapitalist system. The dominant nation is obligedto protect the markets upon which its internal econ-omy is built. This leads to potential rivalry amongcapitalist nations and forces them to protect theirmarkets either by annexation of territory or byobtaining economic and political influence overother countries.

This became the major debate between the ortho-dox Marxist-Leninist and the Marxist dependencytheorist. Where Lenin and his followers saw capitalflowing from the advanced capitalist nations to theareas now called third world, or less developednations, and creating distorted capitalist social rela-tions there, the dependency theorist sees capitalflowing from the poorer nations to advanced centersof capitalism. Frank claims that what was created inthe third world was not distorted capitalist relations,but underdevelopment within capitalism. The dis-tinction between distorted capitalist social relationsand underdevelopment is subtle, but important.Underdevelopment means the poor nations providethe surplus for the advanced nations to further theireconomic development (Frank, Wallerstein, Baran,and Sweezy are the major dependency theorists).

The world capitalist economy, with its own logic,eliminates the competing economic systems from thestart, according to the dependency theorist. Profitsare controlled by worldwide trends that are domi-nated by the center of world capitalism. The capitalistowns the means of production (the raw materials andtools necessary, as well as the labor power purchasedfrom the worker). Capitalism becomes productionfor profits in a market economy.

This, as Fernandez and O’Campo claim, obscuresthe analysis of the development of social relations offree labor to capital. Dependency theory eliminatesthe transitional periods from precapitalist to capital-ist eras, because they claim capitalism was fully devel-oped at the end of the feudal period. In addition,Marx, as claimed by Fernandez, writes that social rela-tions are the necessary definition of capitalism or anyeconomic system. The worker must be free to selllabor power to the capitalist; also, the capitalist mustbe able to introduce the past labor of others in theform of the means of production. This is importantbecause the surplus value or the profit created is thedriving force of the capitalist economy.

The Leninists claimed that what is central to theMarxist definition of capitalism is the productive rela-tionship of workers owning nothing but their ownability to labor or to sell labor power for a wage. Whatthe worker creates above a wage goes to the capitalistin the form of surplus value. The capitalists control, ifnot own, the means of production. The means of pro-duction is past labor embodied in the raw materials ofcurrent production, including land and tools neces-sary in that production, as well as the labor purchasedfrom the worker. Social relations in production arecentral to the relationships between people.

Dependency theory, by focusing on the flow ofexcess profit out of the third world, explains the lackof capital necessary for the poor countries to controltheir own industrial development directly. In depen-dency theory, far from being a sign of decadence,imperialism is a part of a market economy and is asign of the vitality of the capitalist system. What thedependency theorists miss is that in point of fact,subsystems with their own logic exist; however, anysubsystem remains dependent on the larger capitalistsystem. Both dependency theory and Marxist-Leninisttheory can supplement each other in a more completetheory of imperialism.

The control over the economy rests with outsidemajor corporations. Profits generated in the less

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


developed nations increase the wealth and power ofthe major corporations. Profits generated in thesepoor nations are reinvested anywhere in the world.There is clearly the export of capital from the domi-nant culture to the less developed nations, creating astrong money-based market economy that is highlystratified, and that affects the very fiber of the every-day life of all people. Traditional social relations,while still present, are weakened and continuouslyredefined over time.

Articulation of Modes of Production

The interrelationship between local modes of pro-duction and the dominant economic logic is an ongo-ing historical process, changing constantly in aninteractive relationship. According to Rey’s model, thefirst contact between capitalism and other modes ofproduction begins with commercial exchange wherethe needs of the larger capitalist system reinforce theprecapitalist modes of production. This is followed bycapitalism becoming firmly established, subordinat-ing the precapitalist modes but still making use ofthem. Finally, in Rey’s model, there is total incorpora-tion into the world capitalist system with the com-plete disappearance of all precapitalist modes ofproduction. Rey closely follows Marx’s study ofBritish colonial relations over India. Marx claims thatat the first stage, trade is in luxury items benefitingthe capitalist of a richer country because of anunequal exchange. With industrialization in theadvanced nation, the colonial nations serve as mar-kets for the manufactured goods coming from theindustrialized centers. This has a devastating effect onthe local social structure and modes of production inthe nonindustrialized areas. The precapitalist modesof production are then transformed to meet the needsof the capitalist centers. Up until now, in the nonde-veloped areas of the world, exploitation has been pri-marily an unequal exchange, followed by unequalexchange and markets for manufactured goods. Inthe expansion of the Industrial Revolution, Britishinvestors controlled the extractive industries, whichresulted in the beginning of a wage labor force towork in these industries, that is, the beginning ofcapitalist social relations.

Rey’s first stage of incorporation into a worldwidecapitalist system is the initial link with capitalismthrough commercial exchange. The second stage is thesubordination of precapitalist modes of production

to the needs of international capitalism, which havealready happened in most third-world countries. Thethird stage is the total disappearance of all precapital-ist modes.

Francisconi claims there is a constant restructuringof existing noncapitalist modes of production to meetthe conditions of trade and to withstand the impactof direct capitalist investments. Corresponding to thisrestructuring of existing modes of production is acontinual reinterpretation of local tradition. Throughthis restructuring and readjustment, there is a contin-uous adjustment and resistance to the expanding cap-italist penetration into the local political economy.The reproduction of the noncapitalist modes of pro-duction is the result of capitalist expansion into localeconomies. The above is equally important in under-standing the history of articulation of modes ofproduction, as a functional explanation of capitalistexploitation as well as local resistance to capitalistexpansion.

The incorporation of the world into a single worldcapitalist system develops through tensions and con-tradictions that are inherent in the logic of the capi-talist system itself. Wars, conquest, imperialism, andneocolonialism are deadly necessities for the continu-ing expansion of industrial markets. All small nationscome under the control of more powerful capitalistcenters. The ruin of noncapitalist nations begins withthe first contact of commercial trade. The carefullymanipulated use of symbols of self-determination,by preserving precapitalist modes of production andtraditional ideology, have been used by colonialadministrations to continue the power of interna-tional capitalism.

The neo-Marxist modes of production theoristsinvestigate the structure of economic relationships oflocal communities. The dependency theorists studythe world economy of international power relations. Inboth these theories, social relations become somethingthat is neither fully capitalist, nor are they traditional.Capitalist social relations remain underdeveloped.

The Nature of the Informaland Formal Economy

Because of the incomplete development of capitalistsocial relations in the less developed nations, therehas developed a second economy called the “informalsector,” unregulated and largely untaxed. This secondeconomy is a mixture of advanced capitalism and

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, HISTORY OF 165

traditional kinship economies. Self-employment isgrowing faster than wage labor in many places in theworld and is a result of increasingly restricted oppor-tunities for wage labor. The rapid growth of the infor-mal economy is a direct result of the independentself-employment on a world scale, which meets theneeds of corporate capitalism.

The informal economy has grown rapidly with theincreasing disenfranchisement of labor. With thedecline of the power of organized labor and laborparties around the world, corporate capitalism actu-ally benefits from this increase in the unregulatedlabor supply to provide needed goods and services.

The public sector, welfare organizations, and laborgroups all have been dramatically weakened aroundthe world. Flexibility of production has increased andthe cost of production dramatically lowered.

By the 1990s, the informal economy had becomean integral part of the total economic system. Theclose network that ties formal and informal frees theeconomic system from rigid controls, to the benefit ofcapitalism as a whole.

The main question that economic anthropologistsstruggle with is, how much can anthropologists bor-row from formal academic economic theory in study-ing people in different historical and cultural settings?Marxist and substantivist anthropologists define eco-nomic as providing for the material necessities of life,while formal economics looks at economic choices inhow societies and individuals invest their resources.Marxist economics concentrates on production,while formal and substantivist economics look at dis-tribution as more central to their studies. Finally, howmuch of the precapitalist and noncapitalist behaviorssurvive in local communities dominated by a globalcapitalist economy? Thus, it must be asked, howmuch of price theory, marginal utility, and othermajor concepts is relevant to anthropology?

— Michael Joseph Francisconi

See also Lenin, Vladimir I. U.; Marx, Karl; Marxism;Materialism, Cultural

Further Readings

Chayanov, A. V. (1986). The theory of peasant economy.Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Dalton, G. (1969). Theoretical issues in economicanthropology. Current Anthropologist, 10, 63–102.

Donham, D. (1999). History power, ideology: Centralissues in Marxist anthropology. Berkeley: Universityof California Press.

Francisconi, M. J. (1998). Kinship, capitalism change:The informal economy of the Navajo, 1868–1995.New York: Garland.

Halperian, R. (1994). Cultural economics past andpresent. Austin: University of Texas Press.

Frank, A. G. (1967). Capitalism and theunderdevelopment in Latin America. New York:Monthly Review.

Polanyi, K. (1968). Primitive, archaic, and moderneconomics. Boston: Beacon Press.

Rees, M., & Smart, J. (2001). Plural globalities inmultiple localities. Lanham, MD: Rowman &Littlefield.

Sahlins, M. (1974). Stone Age economics. New York:Aldine.

Szymanski, A. (1981). Logic of imperialism. New York:Praeger.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, HISTORY OF

Anthropology is the science of humans. If we takescience in a broad sense as rigorous intellectualinquiry, anthropology has occurred in a number oftimes and places, whenever literate thinkers recordedobservations and analyses of humanity, particularlythose involving diverse cultures and physical forms.Anthropology also refers to a historically specificsocial formation: the product of university-trainedscholars within the boundaries of a discipline of thesame name. In this sense, it has existed only sincethe late 19th century. Whichever definition we use, afew basic lines of inquiry apply. Anthropologists areinfluenced by their surrounding social, cultural, andpolitical settings. In this sense, each era has its ownanthropology. At the same time, the technology ofrecording intellectual products in writing enables anelement of progress, as scholars look back on the workof previous writers. One can thus put forward a narra-tive of successive schools of thought. In a third sense,however, anthropology is not the progress of ideasand information, but the endless repetition (often inperceptive ways) of human preoccupations (forexample, progressivism versus primitivism or roman-ticism versus objectivism), because anthropology

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, HISTORY OF166

involves humans considering humans, the subjectstudying itself.

Among the many anthropologies produced bypremodern intellectuals (for example, Herodotus andother Greek scholars and Chinese bureaucrats andtravelers), let us focus on one exemplary individual,Ibn Khaldun (1332–1406). An itinerant political spe-cialist, he traveled through the western Islamic world(North Africa and Spain) and had reading knowledgeof domains to the east. He concluded that historyrevolved around the interplay between cities andnomadic peoples, noting the forces of social cohesionin tribal formations and wider-scale religious move-ments. He described his analytical approach as “thescience of culture.” Of course, Ibn Khaldun’s workdepended on a dominant political-religious formation,Islam, as did subsequent European-based anthropol-ogy, but there is still much to learn from his work.

From the late 1400s on, Western Europeansattempted to conquer and proselytize the rest of theworld. At the same time, European societies them-selves underwent vast transformations, includingmercantile and industrial capitalism, urbanization,commercial agriculture, and the rise of the nation-state. Modern anthropology emerged within this con-text. As Europeans catalogued the peoples that theydrew into commercial slavery and estate agriculture,they developed a preoccupation with human bodies(heads, height, skin color, and so on). As they tradedwith, governed, and tried to convert diverse peoplesfrom Indonesia to Greenland, they began to docu-ment vast differences in customs. And their ownchanges lead them to theorize about progressive,ranked sequences of social structure and beliefs.

Rich (if biased) descriptive anthropology camefrom the 16th- and 17th-century expansion, in par-ticular the Catholic missionary orders’ documenta-tion of the cultures of their would-be converts. It was,however, during the late 17th- and 18th-centuryEnlightenment that the first flourishing of Europeananthropology took place. Intellectuals speculatedabout the fundamental nature of the human species,so-called philosophical anthropology. Likewise, clas-sification of human cultures and physiques flourished,leaving an enduring concern with “race” in physicalanthropology. Anthropology also began its move intowhat Michel-Rolph Trouillot calls the “savage slot,”specialization in non-Western, “colored,” and sub-ordinated peoples, even though anthropology claimedto be the study of all humankind. Colonialism was a

context for this, as well as the problematic assumptionthat “primitives” held the key to human nature, butthe savage slot also provides anthropology a legacyof deep knowledge of, close association with, andmembers from among peoples who are otherwiseignored, despised, and badly stereotyped.

The Enlightenment and the beginning of 19th-century Romanticism also provided key concepts stillused today in anthropology. The notion of civiliza-tion came from the hierarchical ranking of customsin centralizing absolutist-monarchical contexts, suchas prerevolutionary France. Culture as a way of dis-tinguishing peoples by their languages and customsemerged as a separatist reaction to civilization-settingcenters (concretely, among nationalistic Germansreacting to French political and cultural domina-tion). Society was a way of envisioning voluntaristic,person-to-person order amidst the rapid changesof industrialization, migration, urbanization, and thedecline of previous hierarchical, ascribed feudal andabsolutist orders. Other concepts, such as ideology,economy, classes, and race (as mentioned above), canalso be traced to this era.

Evolution was a European preoccupation evenbefore Darwin’s theory of natural selection and gainedenormous intellectual prestige with his work. But thenatural selection model of evolution was less influen-tial than its assumed progressiveness, so 19th-centuryanthropologists (Tylor, Morgan, Spencer, and others)elaborated schemes of ascending cultural stages. Theexample of enormous technological progress withinindustrial capitalism was before them and triumphantimperialism throughout the world. Their theoriesrested, on one hand, on the basic unity of humankind,rendering the anthropological preoccupation with“primitive” cultures relevant to the study of overallhuman history, and at the same time, they invariablyplaced the educated upper classes of Europe and Euro-America at the pinnacle of cultural development. Suchapproaches offer insights into the genuinely accumula-tive aspects of cultural history, such as technology andhierarchical political organization, while being deeplyflawed by insisting on progress in domains such as artor morality. Anthropologists were often gentlemenscientists with nonprofessional incomes but recog-nized expertise. Their concept of research includedsecondary gathering of data (for example, lists ofcustoms) as well as primary field collection, consistentwith the intellectual framework of the progress ofculture (note the singular) across all places and times.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, HISTORY OF 167

Anthropology underwent a process of academicprofessionalization around 1900. For example, recog-nized scholarship usually required a PhD from auniversity department specialized in anthropology.This provided the social framework for tighteningstandards of evidence and analysis. In the UnitedKingdom, and somewhat later in parts of continentalEurope and in British colonies (the quintessentialfigure was Bronislaw Malinowski, a Polish migrant toBritain), this movement raised the expectations forfieldwork, emphasizing long-term particpant obser-vation, including use of the native language. This wasfacilitated by a context of governed colonies with adominated but still active non-Western social life;hence, the British explored functionalist analyses ofvarious kinds, emphasizing the coordination of ideas,behavioral norms, and activities within a positivesocial whole. The functionalists rejected speculativehistory, and they averted their eyes from some reali-ties of colonialism (such as migratory wage labor),resulting in a characteristic blindness to questions ofpower and change.

Meanwhile, in the United States, and then Canadaand Mexico, Franz Boas (a German immigrant to theU.S.) and his students sharply critiqued speculativehistories and general evolutionary schemes and dedi-cated themselves to careful reconstructions of pre-contact Native American cultural traits. As theyexamined how traits cohered in local clusters, theyemphasized learned patterns of ideas and activities,essentially our current culture concept. Notably, theBoasians shifted the question of culture from thesingular—the cumulative trajectory of all humanaccomplishments—to the plural, the manifestation ofculture in a local place and time. Boas also called forcareful physical anthropology as he did battle withpseudoscientific “eugenics” (the speculative attribu-tion of all human qualities to genetic inheritance).This formed part of broad struggles against racismand anti-immigrationism. In the United States, thoughnot in Europe, anthropology thus came to include allinquiries into the human condition, from humanbiology through archaeology, to the total range of pastand present human languages and cultures. However,the relationship of academic anthropologists to their“subjects” was ambivalent, vindicating their worthwithin a society inclined to disparage or ignore thembut also treating them as almost collectible objectswhose human rights were less important than theintellectual needs of science.

World War II, and the powerful national andglobal military and economic institutions that fol-lowed it, reshaped the organization and intellectualconcerns of anthropology. Universities grew rapidly,and governments sponsored large volumes of research.The focus of U.S. anthropology shifted from its inter-nal subjects, Native Americans, to international polit-ical and economic spheres of power, such as LatinAmerica and Southeast Asia. Although anthropologydid not abandon the study of small-scale societies,it increasingly addressed peasants, plantation work-ers, migrants, and cities. As a result, anthropologicaltheories paid increasing attention to inequality, states,social change, and after global movements for democ-racy and justice started in the 1960s, power andresistance.

From the 1940s to the 1960s, perhaps influenced bythe apogee of cold-war national and global bureaucra-cies, anthropologists strongly emphasized systemstheories, examining, for example, human-environ-mental relations or the structure of ideas. Fromthe late 1960s onward, scholars began to questionthe total perfection of systems (while retaining theinsights of systems dynamics), including questioningthe boundedness and coherence of cultures and theconsensus and functional benefits of societies. Rather,cultures and societies were viewed as localized andtemporally situated nexuses of fluid practices andideas within endlessly mutating networks of world-wide relations.

Considerable progress was also made in biologicalanthropology and archaeology. In the former, themodern synthesis of genetics with Darwinian evolu-tionary theory finally arrived in anthropology, dismiss-ing the fascination with racial body types in favor ofmodels of complex variation and adaptive dynamics;at the same time, the empirical record of human pale-ontology became much better established, pointing toa series of origins in Africa. In the 20th century, archae-ologists had established scientifically robust methods,such as the use of stratigraphic excavation and variousrelative and absolute dating techniques; by the middleof the century, they also began to treat their subjectsas the study of past cultures and societies throughmaterial remains rather than the documentation ofone phase of objects after another. As anthropologybecame increasingly specialized in large universities, ittended to fragment, and yet ironically the intellectualfoundations of various branches of anthropology nowspoke to each other much more effectively.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, HISTORY OF168

Anthropology contributed to and has beenreshaped by the increasing intellectual and politicalequality of world peoples (in material terms, however,global inequality has continually worsened). Nationalanthropologies flourished in India, China, SouthAfrica, Brazil, Mexico, and elsewhere. Feminismreshaped anthropology, correctly insisting on theconcerns and perspectives of half of humanity. Andindigenous people’s increased self-determination inintellectual as well as political terms inevitably chal-lenged anthropology’s science-for-science’s-sake mis-sion and its place in the “savage slot.” Anthropologistsat their best responded with greater self-awareness(“reflexivity”) about ideas and politics. They engagedmore openly in public issues and have begun collabo-ration with communities, seen as subjects and notjust scientific objects. The application of anthropo-logical knowledge and methods to practical problemsbecame vital, both because of the trends identifiedabove and because anti-intellectual, militarist, andcapitalist employment and research funding priori-ties by post-1968 universities and governmentsresulted in a glut of academic PhDs.

Two important questions now loom on anthropol-ogy’s horizon. In this would-be new world order,offering both possibilities of repression and libera-tion, how can anthropologists combine their politi-cal-ethical and objective scientific commitments?And as anthropological concepts such as “cultures” or“human nature” come to be part of the public lexiconand thus are infused with various ideological tenden-cies and manipulations, how can anthropologistspromote their use in the most thoughtful and ethicalmanner?

— Josiah McC. Heyman

See also Anthropology, Characteristics of; Anthropology,Cultural; Anthropology, Philosophical; Boas, Franz;Malinowski, Bronislaw

Further Readings

Adams, W. Y. (1998). The philosophical roots ofanthropology. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

di Leonardo, M. (1998). Exotics at home:Anthropologies, others, American modernity.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kuper, A. (1983). Anthropology and anthropologists(Rev. ed.). London: Routledge.

Malefijt, A. de Waal. (1974). Images of man: A historyof anthropological thought. New York: Knopf.

Stocking, G. W. Jr. (1982). Race, culture, and evolution:Essays in the history of anthropology. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

Trigger, B. G. (1989). A history of archaeologicalthought. Cambridge and New York: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Vincent, J. (1990). Anthropology and politics: Visions,traditions, and trends. Tucson: University ofArizona Press.

Wolf, E. R. (1999). Envisioning power: Ideologies ofdominance and crisis. Berkeley and Los Angeles:University of California Press.

FUTURE OF ANTHROPOLOGY

Anthropology, which has always held that, as thepoet said, “the proper study of mankind is man,”has taught us much of what we know aboutourselves as human beings living together insociety. Whether it was Frank Hamilton Cushing’spioneering work among the Zuni Indians in NewMexico or Margaret Mead in American Samoa andNew Guinea, anthropologists have held up a mirrorin which to reveal much about what really makes ushuman. Now, 125 years after Cushing began hiswork among the Zunis, anthropology may be facingthe most challenging chapter in its history.

When Cushing, Franz Boas, and the otherpathfinders of anthropology began their work, mostpeople still lived and died in the country of theirbirth. Even when, as with the great migrations tothe United States, millions of immigrants arrivedfrom Europe in the 19th century, they sought outpeople from their same ethnic backgrounds torecreate the cultural and ethnic communities oftheir homelands. Even today, in 2005, the Irish inHavertown, Pennsylvania, refer to their city as“Ireland’s thirty-third county,” because of their warmidentification with their ancestral home. (Irelanditself is formed of 32 counties: 6 part of BritishNorthern Ireland, and 26 in the Republic of Irelandto the south.) By the time large-scale immigration

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, HUMANISTIC 169

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, HUMANISTIC

As Eric Wolf notes in “Anthropology,” his 1964 essay,anthropology is “the most scientific of the humani-ties, the most humanist of the sciences.” Anthropo-logists have commonly taken into consideration thehuman condition—that which makes us distinctlyhuman. However, maintaining balance betweenanthropology as a science that is concerned withcausation, structure, function, and the predictabilityof human and cultural variation and anthropologyas a humanity that is concerned with the function ofhuman minds and how humans create their socialand cultural worlds has not been easy. Historically,this has created a tension within anthropology, asanthropologists tend to conduct research toward oneof these poles. At the same time, this underlyingdichotomy propels the discipline and makes it distinctfrom both the natural sciences and the humanities.

From the earlier research of Ruth Benedict andRobert Redfield to the more recent research of RuthBehar and Edith Turner, cultural anthropologistshave long advocated humanistic concerns andapproaches to the understanding of human thoughtand creativity from a distinctly insider’s perspective.As is noted in the Society for Humanistic Anthropo-logy’s charter, humanistic anthropology “celebratesthat human reality is something upon which we cre-ative primates have real feedback effects: We canchange our social and natural environment.” It takesthe position, which is illustrated in the ethnographicand theoretical writing of the above anthropologists,

ended around the time of World War I, America’spopulation had been swelled by millions ofimmigrants, almost entirely from Europe.

Now, however, thanks to the long-distance travelmade possible by commercial airlines, immigrantsare arriving in countries far removed not onlyculturally and ethnically from the country in whichthey were born—but even from the continent.Indians are arriving in large numbers to work in theburgeoning computer industry in the United States.Turkish gastarbeiters, “guest workers,” continue tocome to Germany to take jobs left vacant becauseof the country’s declining population. AndAmericans, in quest of oil business, migrate to theMiddle East, Central Asia, and the oil fields ofSoutheast Asia.

The result of such immigration to totally alienenvironments can be unsettling and even lead toviolence between the new arrivals and the residentpopulations. After Germany was reunited in 1989,neo-Nazi skinheads embarked on a reign of terroragainst the Turkish workers living in German cities.Today, Muslims newly arrived from North Africahave increased the anti-Semitism directed againstJews in France. And in 1981, after the fall of SouthVietnam in 1975, Louis Beam and Ku Klux Klanextremists carried out a campaign of intimidationagainst Vietnamese fisherman in Galveston Bay,Texas.

If the past is any guide to the future, suchincidents will not only continue, but may in factincrease. Faced with such a future, policy plannerscan look for help to those who have made thegreatest contribution to studying the interaction ofhuman societies in the past: anthropologists.Already, noted anthropologists have undertakensuch cross-cultural work in the past. Two of thesewere students of Boaz at Columbia University,Margaret Mead and Ruth Benedict. In 1959, Meadpublished People and Places, while Benedict hadpublished Patterns of Culture in 1934. The need toturn to anthropology to help build a global futurefor humankind is already critical. Between April andJune 1994, some 800,000 members of the Tutsitribe and opposition Hutus were slaughtered by thedominant Hutu population in the African country ofRwanda. While Rwanda descended into a nightmareof massacre, neighboring Kenya remained peaceful,despite the fact that its population also came from

different tribes, Kikuyu (also Gikuyu), Masai, andsmaller tribes like the Pokot. Perhaps one reasonthat Kenya had survived major tribal unrest since itsindependence in 1963 was that is first president,Jomo Kenyatta, had worked as an anthropologist,studying his own Kikuyu tribe in Facing MountKenya (1938). From the beginning, Kenyatta hadled Kenya with the slogan of “Harrambee,” Swahilifor “all working together” (translations vary), apolicy that embraced not only the native Africans,but the European settlers as well.

— John F. Murphy, Jr.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, HUMANISTIC170

too, that anthropological inquiry includes “promotingmulticultural understanding and revealing the socialblockages that are deleterious to our social and physicalenvironment.” In essence, humanistic anthropologicalapproaches reject blind positivistic scientific analyses,dogma in all manifestations, and extreme culturalrelativism. Despite this long-standing position,humanistic anthropology did not become a concerted,self-consciously embraced approach until the early1970s, which was due in large part to the efforts ofEdith Turner.

Turner’s humanistic orientation is rooted in sym-bolic, or interpretive, cultural analysis. The roots ofthis tradition can be seen in E. E. Evans-Pritchard’sethnographic writings on the Azande and the Nuer.Favoring interpretive analytical strategies, he rejectedanthropology as a natural science and placed it withinthe humanities. His basic approach to the study ofsociety, which is based on learning thought processesthrough the beliefs and opinions of members of thesocial group being studied, fits nicely with contempo-rary humanistic anthropological approaches to study-ing human cultural difference, because it emphasizesindigenous concepts and models of explanation.

As interpretive anthropology emerged from themargins of anthropological theory and practice inthe early 1960s, humanistic approaches became evenmore central in cultural analyses. Although at thattime, Mary Douglas, Victor Turner, and CliffordGeertz did not call themselves humanistic anthropol-ogists, their theoretical and methodological practiceshave done much to shape humanistic anthropologytoday. In general, they contend that human culture isbased on a system of symbols and meanings, whichhumans create and use to direct, organize, and givecoherence to their lives. The emphasis is on meaningrather than on the materiality of human life or oninnate structures of the mind. Each went in a distinc-tive direction with regard to symbolic analysis, whilebeing anchored within a humanistic framework.Douglas combines Durkheimian functionalism withthe ways that cultural symbols reflect social order, asbest illustrated in her book Purity and Danger (1966).Through an exploration of beliefs about purity andpollution, she shows links between the human bodyand society. Turner, in contrast, focuses on ritual per-formance and practice but was less interested in sym-bols themselves, concentrating on what they mean topeople as they use them and are inspired to action bythem. By comparison, Geertz, drawing heavily from

the sociologist Talcott Parsons and philosophers,such as Alfred Schutz, Gilbert Ryle, and LudwigWittgenstein, focuses on the interpretation of culture,which for him is a system of symbols and meaningsthat are publicly displayed in actions and objects cre-ated and made meaningful through human socialinteraction. In Interpretation of Cultures, Geertz seeksto understand culture in its own terms through avariety of analytical practices, not exclusively anthro-pological. Like Redfield before him, whose theoriesof Great and Little Traditions helped to democratizehumanities scholarship, which focused on “high cul-ture” rather than “low, mundane culture,” Geertz’sthesis that ethnographies should be understood astexts to be read alongside the local, indigenous-produced texts helped break down the divisionsbetween outside researcher and local insider-subject.One tour-de-force example of this trend in inter-pretive analysis that is well-grounded in humanitiesscholarship is Turner and Bruner’s 1986 volume,The Anthropology of Experience, which includeschapters by the leading interpretive and humanisticanthropologists of the time: Renato Rosaldo, BarbaraMyerhoff, James Fernandez, Barbara Babcock, andGeertz. The book breaks even more from the tradi-tion of structuralism rooted in Emile Durkheimand A. R. Radcliffe-Brown to embrace WilhelmDilthey’s “concept of an experience, Erlebnis, or whathas been ‘lived through’ . . . [where the contributors]focus . . . more on experience, pragmatics, practice,and performance.”

Some themes raised in The Anthropology ofExperience, such as ethnography as narrative, reflexiv-ity, and authorship, are also treated in Clifford andMarcus’s volume, Writing Culture: The Poetics andPolitics of Ethnography, but it serves more as a cri-tique of anthropological practice. Underlying it areFoucauldian concepts of power relations, which chal-lenge the contributors to rethink their respective, aswell as those of the discipline, positions vis-à-vis theirsubjects and the texts that they produce. The contrib-utors clearly advocate humanities-based strategies toimprove cultural analysis, as they argue for culturalanthropologists to take into consideration literaryand philosophical concepts and methods (somethingthat Ruth Benedict did in the 1934 book Patterns ofCulture); to experiment with new forms of writing—especially those that include the subjects’ voices; and,drawing on postmodernism, to recognize the arbi-trariness of culture, the power/subject position of the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, HUMANISTIC 171

researcher, the resistance to master narratives, and theincompleteness of the ethnographic endeavor.

Although the main theses in Writing Culture gener-ated debate within the discipline and were largelyaccepted by cultural anthropologists, the volumewas criticized for its male, Eurocentric orientation,first by anthropologists of color in the 1991 volume,Recapturing Anthropology, and then by feministanthropologists in the 1995 volume, Women WritingCulture. Both volumes argue that the driving forcesbehind anthropological practice, be they methodolog-ical or theoretical, need not be dominated by whitemen and Western ideological and historical para-digms. The contributors to Recapturing Anthropologyin particular argue that scholars cannot control thehistorical conditions in which their representationsare located or future readings of them. Moreover, thevery location of anthropological research, the field,continues to be exoticized and mystified, often beyondanthropologists’ control. In other words, the goal is tofurther democratize the discipline by demarginalizingthe margins, recognizing the contributions of anthro-pology’s internal others, and understanding the his-torical and cultural contexts of the anthropologicalendeavor, all the while drawing on the humanities asbroadly conceived.

In the Women Writing Culture volume, the innova-tive contributions of female anthropologists arenoted, particularly with respect to new forms of cul-tural description that are literary in form. This is bestexemplified in Zora Neale Hurston’s largely ignoredethnographic writings and novels, in Edith Turner’spoignant personal ethnography, Spirit and the Drum(1987), and in Laura Bohannan’s archetypical ethno-graphic novel, Return to Laughter (also noted inWolf ’s essay “Anthropology”). Bohannan wrote hernovel in 1954 under the nom de plume, EleanorSmith Bowen, for fear of negative fallout from heranthropologist peers. Her novel has since inspired awhole genre of writing. From the writing of StanleyDiamond to Dennis Tedlock and others, poetry hasalso become a form of cultural representation/pre-sentation of others by anthropologists. These literaryforays have not been exclusively based on Westernmodels, but have incorporated non-Western modesof thought, aesthetics, and themes that anthropolo-gist-creative writers learn while doing fieldwork.

The Foucauldian question of power raised inWriting Culture and experimentations in writingstyles have resulted in humanistic anthropologists

rethinking the relationship between anthropologistand subject. The impersonal term, informant, is beingreplaced with friend, colleague, expert, collaborator,and others, as humanistic anthropologists recognizethe intense, intersubjective relationships they andtheir subjects share. Furthermore, as native, localforms of knowledge and analysis are elevated on parwith those of anthropologists and are incorporatedinto anthropological modes of method, theory, andanalysis, the traditional anthropological “informant”becomes even more awkward to employ.

As the Society for Humanistic Anthropology states,“Humanism has historically made the human endeavorthe subject of its concerns. Humanistic anthropologyseeks to bring the intellectual resources of the disciplineto bear upon this subject.” Founded in 1974 at theAmerican Anthropological Association’s annual meet-ing, then held in Mexico City, the members of theSociety for Humanistic Anthropology have deliberatedover the methodological, theoretical, and topical con-cerns described above. The primary vehicle for this isthe journal, Anthropology and Humanism, which isedited by Edith Turner. The journal takes a holisticapproach to the understanding of “what it is to behuman” by soliciting contributions from all fields ofanthropology, the humanities, and the sciences. It pub-lishes articles that help further humanistic anthropol-ogy via new trends in the humanities, illustrate thelinkages between anthropological fields and humanisticanthropology, and explore the contradictory processesof life in other cultures and also those of the anthropol-ogists. In addition, it embraces the creative cultural rep-resentations of anthropologists by regularly publishingessays, fiction, poetry, and other art forms.

Humanistic anthropology clearly has no easilydelineated academic boundaries, as Edith Turnernotes on her faculty Web page at University ofVirginia:

My theoretical interests have developed from [Victor]Turner’s “anthropology of experience,” a field thathas been spreading in anthropology to narratology,humanistic anthropology, and the anthropologyof consciousness. Good anthropology rests onhumanism—that is, respect for the ideas and religionsof other cultures and, where possible, the willingnessto experience through the eyes of others. Analysistherefore has seriously to take into consideration local“exegesis’” (interpretation), and local statements ofexperience.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, PHILOSOPHICAL172

Humanistic anthropology’s vitality rests on the abilityof anthropologists to utilize new and alternativemodes of knowledge drawn from both scientific andhumanistic fields.

— Walter E. Little

See also Anthropology of Women; Benedict, Ruth; Evans-Pritchard, Edward; Turner, Edith

Further Readings

Behar, R., & Gordon, D. A. (1995). Women writingculture. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Clifford, J., & Marcus, G. E. (Eds.). (1986). Writingculture: The poetics and politics of ethnography.Berkeley: University of California Press.

Fox, R. G. (Ed.). (1991). Recapturing anthropology:Working in the present. Santa Fe, NM: School ofAmerican Research Press.

Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures.New York: Basic Books.

Turner, V. W., & Bruner, E. M. (Eds.). (1986). Theanthropology of experience. Urbana and Chicago:University of Illinois Press.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, PHILOSOPHICAL

Anthropology, a discipline that encompasses fiveareas or subdisciplines, provides a comprehensiveview of our species’ origin, present state, and future.As a science, anthropology can be considered as arecent academic discipline; however, the fundamentalinquiry into human origin, social structure, andhuman interaction has its roots in the tradition ofphilosophy. From the first materialists of Ionian (ca585 BCE) to the metaphysics of Aristotle (384–322BCE) and later the theology by Thomas Aquinas(1225–1274 CE), the geocentric and anthropocentricpositions concerning our species’ epistemology,ontology, and teleology has a directly impacted theconduct of science. As illustrated in foundationalphilosophic masterpieces (for example, Aristotle’sPhysics and Metaphysics and Aquinas’s SummaTheologica), these metaphysical concepts directlyinfluence the context by which both the evidence andinterpretations are sought or derived. Given thisestablished logical necessity of metaphysics, any

modern theoretical reference must be able to sufficientlydepict these metaphysical views based on currentavailable scientific evidence. From these dialectics,science and metaphysics work in unison, via logic, toproduce a coherent and accurate explanation con-cerning human existence within a dynamic universe.

As for anthropology, the influences of CharlesDarwin (1809–1882) upon the metaphysics that gov-ern science are profound. Darwin’s theory of organicevolution had permanently refuted the fixity (eternal)of species as depicted by either Aristotle or Aquinas.Cosmologically, and theologically for Aquinas, theGreat Chain of Being was reduced to mere conceptuallinks. The traditional views concerning our ownspecies’ epistemology, ontology, and teleology havebeen far removed from its previous dogmatic position.In its wake, an “arc of interpretations” of evolution anddynamic integrity, as postulated by H. James Birx,resulted in differing metaphysical views. However,not all metaphysical interpretations of evolution arecorrect. It is the duty of the philosopher of science,via philosophical anthropology, to construct andimplement a theoretical framework that correctlyreflects this metaphysical foundation; all of which isbased on rational speculation based on currentphysical evidence.

It becomes obvious that the philosophical frame-work that stimulated this inquiry into human exis-tence and its origin precedes the academic structureof anthropology that is known today. However, itbecomes necessary to acknowledge that it is the evolu-tionary framework that both accounts for and is thesustaining factor in the philosophical cohesion of thescientific basis for anthropology; for without this evo-lutionary framework, what remains is incoherent,unsubstantiated conjecture that is sometimes accom-panied with cosmological innuendo. When examiningthe plethora of theoretical constructs or paradigms,it becomes evident that the foundational structuresof anthropology have become obscured from theoriginal esprit de corps set forth by rational and criti-cal inquiry based on this evolutionary approach.Ultimately, the lack of a philosophically sound grandtheoretical framework has caused fracturing amongthe subdisciplines of anthropology. The greateststrength of anthropology stems from its multidisci-plinary approach to the study of our species that andapproach is now in jeopardy. Though the theoreticalconstruct for physical anthropology and forensicanthropology remains stable, philosophically speaking,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, PHILOSOPHICAL 173

it is the subdisciplines of archaeology, linguistics,and to the greatest extent, cultural anthropology thathave become subjected to the greatest risk.

Currently, there are three major perspectiveswithin anthropology: diachronic, synchronic, andinteractive. Each perspective, some compatible andsome contradictory, contains several particular pointsof view that establish an integral ontology and teleol-ogy from which an epistemologically derived anthro-pological interpretation of the available evidence arebased. Upon examination, it becomes evident thatnot only does anthropology need a grand theoreticalframework but also which paradigm becomes philo-sophically sound.

Diachronic Perspectives

Diachronic perspectives, a perspective that tracesrelationships through time, include theories of evolu-tionism, diffusionism, cultural area synthesis, andMarxism. Though evolutionary theory had a pro-found influence on philosophy, the resulting philo-sophical traditions manifested themselves in fourevolutionary perspectives: unilinear (stresses one lineof evolution that passes through particular stages),universal (stresses generalized stages of evolution),multilinear (stresses both diversity and environmentalfactors), and neo-Darwinism (stresses a synthesizedapproach to evolutionary biology and behavior).Progressively, each evolutionary perspective attemptsto add and contribute defining boundaries to theevolutionary process as proposed by Darwin.

As reflected in evolutionary theory, our species isconsidered one species with differences on the pheno-typic level. Using this concept within a Darwinianframework, the unilinear view holds that all pop-ulations pass through the same stages of culturedevelopment at different rates—essentially onespecies; therefore, there is one line of development.The interdependency of various factors within eachcultural stage will eventually propel the populationinto the next stage in their own cultural genesis. Inresponding to problems with the unilinear approach,universal evolutionism held a more generalized viewconcerning stages of development. The creation ofgeneralized categories based on maximum criterionencompassing each category offers a greater advan-tage; yet the defining characteristic that may describea given culture fails to offer a sense of accountability.The progression to multilinear evolutionism seems in

itself an evolution of evolutionary theory. The strengthof this perspective resides in the acknowledgement ofthe environmental factor that influences culturaldevelopment. Through regional mapping of culture,what emerges are patterns of adaptive responses toexternal factors. The most recent evolutionary per-spective, neo-Darwinism, encompasses progressivetheories from biology, genetics, sociobiology, psy-chology, and cognitive sciences. Though the evidenceand philosophical (theoretical) underpinnings are inthe process of being united, the ontological, teleologi-cal, and epistemological realities are grounded inmaterialist interpretation of the evidence within anevolutionary framework. Acknowledging yet disre-garding the importance of evolution, diffusionism,and later cultural area, attempted to offer differingexplanatory factors.

In contrast to evolutionism (any form), diffusion-ism, either the German-Austrian or British perspective,regards culture, including the development thereof,as expressions that originate and are transmitted fromone population to another. In this regard, a culturalaspect may diffuse, but cultural complexes are dueto migration or conquest. From this view, culturalsimilarities are prioritized by ethnocentric attitudesconcerning advancements and thus accordingly arestigmatized. The readily available patterns of culturedictated by diffusionist theory created the concept ofthe cultural area, whereby each cultural area wouldbe comprised of essential traits of that particulararea. This process of compiling vast amounts of dataresulted in the ability to compare and contrast traitsamong various cultures. Within these perspectives,the ontological perspective has a philosophical tingethat borders on predestination, whereby advance-ments are internalized ontologically, then expressedin a teleological manner. Epistemologically, it appearsthat all cultures are able to adaptively learn but fewcan create. This essentially creates a “natural order”by which social interaction is governed. Thoughthe logistics for such judgments are illusive, theseperspectives incorporate a latent form of the survivalof the fittest. In these comparisons, a greater under-standing of population interaction and cultural adap-tation was made possible.

The remaining diachronic perspective is Marxism.Marxism, a perspective based on a segmented part ofphilosophy postulated by Karl Marx, focuses on therelationship between modes of production and powerstructure. Within this structure, distinction between

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, PHILOSOPHICAL174

infrastructure and superstructure aid in the definingproperties of the common conceptualization of theterm society. From this process of analysis, powerstructure can be analyzed in terms of center andperiphery. This perspective offers all the advantagesinherited from the philosophy of Marx: historicaloutlook, the importance of economy and its role inpolitics, materialism, and evolution, all of which hadgreat explanatory power. However, Marx’s misunder-standing of both human evolution and psychology isreflected within this perspective. The resulting episte-mology, ontology, and teleology become erroneousdue to their skew and fixity.

Synchronic Perspectives

Synchronic perspectives, perspectives that trace rela-tionships within the same time, includes theories ofrelativism, structuralism, functionalism, and struc-ture functionalism. In relativism, the existence ofcultural universals is denied in favor of particularsrelevant to a particular culture. Relativism includesdescriptive, normative, cognitive, moral, and episte-mological. The primary philosophical position statesthat an individual’s culture is the only standardknown in itself, whereby objective statements or eval-uation of another culture are not possible. Truth,morals, and perceived facts are contingent solely bythe arbitrariness of birth. If this perspective is correctin its entirety, the philosophical implications aretwofold: International regulation and disseminationof knowledge (for example, science), are not possible.In this same manner, the only ontology and teleologythat can be epistemologically acquired is by the societyby which an individual was exposed. Objectivity ofscience becomes irrelevant, and humanity itselfbecomes obscured. Unlike relativism, functionalismacknowledges both the capability and process bywhich cultures can be objectively studied.

In the functionalist perspective, focus is placedupon the functionality of organizations and theirrelated practices for individuals in a society. Functiona-lism, in a philosophical sense, was always a point ofinquiry. From this approach, an individual and socialmeaning are derived from and are dependent on thefunctions of the interrelating organizations and theirparticular customs or traditions. Although acknowl-edging but not stressing evolution, the adaptive processof culture signifies this functional aspect of evolu-tion (need and cultural response). Philosophically, an

individual’s ontology and teleology are directly formedby the epistemological limitations set forth by thefunctional parameters of the organization. Thoughfunctionalism does have its strength, structural func-tionalism offers additional benefits.

Structural functionalism, a perspective that incor-porates both structure and function, focuses upon thestructural and functional order of organizations inrespect to society. Accordingly, each structure and itsrelated function interact in a cohesive fashion (organicmodel). Within an anthropological inquiry, structuralfunctionalism primarily deals with the observed inter-action among social institutions based upon currentevidence. Once again, this approach acknowledgesboth evolution and the attainability of objective scien-tific knowledge but fails to concern itself with the ori-gin of cultural particulars. In defining properties, thisperspective allows human ontology and teleology todevelop under the function and form of social institu-tions. Epistemologically, it is assumed or is latent thatknowledge is acquired and advanced through theinteractions of these institutions.

Structuralism, a perspective that focuses on struc-tural relationships, states that any derived social mean-ing is derived from structure. The basis for this viewis that structure of culture patterns parallels that ofthe human mind and can be expressed in language.The ability to recognize and express this structure as auniversal, or in the terms of Levi-Strauss, collective con-sciousness, results in dynamics between languages andculture that allow for examination on multiple levels.From this perspective, a culture could be understood inthe same manner that an individual reads literatureand more important, provide the ability to access themeaning of cultural expressions that may not be read-ily apparent. This relationship between thought andculture is essential to this perspective. The ontologicalaspect of this perspective appears to reflect the cogni-tive factor of society. In this manner, the definitiveontological assessment becomes indicative of the intel-lectual and psychological components of the socialstructure itself. Furthermore, teleology becomes recip-rocal with this ontological assessment. Epistemologi-cally, the transmission and advancement of knowledgebecomes interred internally within the structure.

Interactive Perspectives

Interactive perspectives, perspectives that focus onaction rather than form or function, include theories

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, PHILOSOPHICAL 175

from processualism, transactionalism, feminism, post-structuralism, and postmodernism. Processualism, aperspective that focuses on any social process andstructural propensities for change, offers a degree ofcritical analysis concerning social process in regard tosocial structure. However ill-defining and erroneous,any ontological and teleological aspects inferred aredrawn from changing social values, though activesocial processes within a dynamic structure are notmetaphysically reflective. Yet the significance of inter-action, especially in evaluating the inferences of philo-sophical implications, remains an important factor.This can be seen in the transactionalist perspective.

Transactionalism, a perspective that focuses onrelationships between or among individuals, providesan adequate basis to expose human motives foranthropological analysis. Through this analysis, aclear indication of values, thought structure, andstability are depicted within this cost-benefit analysisof human interaction. The ontological and teleologi-cal implications, though latent, are inferred from thevalue system used during the process of decisionmaking. Epistemology is unclear but remains in thetradition provided by the Enlightenment. Once again,the metaphysical basis is ambiguous at best.

Unlike the perspectives presented thus far, theremaining three perspectives of feminism, poststruc-turalism, and postmodernism are more a philosophi-cal position than a method for science. Nevertheless,the influences of these perspectives on anthropologyare profound. This is certainly the case with femi-nism. Feminism, a perspective that focuses on issuesfrom the female perspective, offers an alternativepoint of view from the mainstream view. Distortedfrom its original philosophical state, this perspectiveshifts attention to the empathized function of thefemale sex in both society and the evolution of ourspecies. Regardless of its original philosophical valueand the contributions made regarding misconstruedor disregarded areas of study, its inability to defini-tively state a metaphysical claim eliminates any theo-retical plausibility. However, this perspective hasmore of a potential that is compatible with sciencethan the remaining two perspectives.

The perspectives of poststructuralism and post-modernism both indicate a breakdown of science andrational speculation. In this manner, poststructural-ism rejects structuralist methodology in favor ofdeconstruction. This process attempts to illustratethat any structural concepts are negated during its

construction; therefore, these independent structuresof a social system, structurally expressed as subject/object become obscured and impossible to evaluate.These concepts are closely tied with postmodernism.The postmodern perspective, a perspective that rejectsthe validity of objectivity and scientific methods,stresses two points: the impossibility of an inclusivesystem of universals that would objectify the knownworld and, second, that social systems are reflexive.Therefore, the process of reflexivity becomes essentialto the anthropological approach. Besides the blatantcontradictions, fallacious reasoning, and mental pro-cesses that are indicative of a psychosis rather thana theoretical framework, there remains no tenableontology, teleology, and epistemology that is relevantto either anthropology or philosophy.

When constructing or evaluating these theoreticalparadigms, the philosophical implications for scienceconcerning epistemology, ontology, and teleologybecome paramount. The perspectives given illustratethe theoretical problems that anthropology must, atall expense, solve in order to retain its comprehensiveview. From the perspective given, the only solution isa diachronic paradigm based on evolutionary princi-ples. The limitations of both synchronic and inter-active categories become too restrictive in order toestablish a coherent view of our species, though itdoes provide an adequate source for the recording ofcultural information. However, interpretation is asimportant as the methodology. What is needed is theestablishment of a new evolutionary paradigm, whatthis author terms evolutional dynamics.

Evolutional dynamics is active synthesized materi-alistic interpretation of evolution with some prag-matic features. This new theoretical synthesis shouldhave open communication and incorporate the mostrecent advancements from biology (biological anthro-pology), genetics, chemistry, primatology, physics,sociobiology, psychology, cognitive sciences, andcomputer science into an evolutionary framework.With speculation based upon the evidence, an open-ended epistemology, ontology, and teleology wouldprovide a united fundamental basis for all areas ofanthropology. Though a complete detail of this theo-retical concept is beyond the scope of this summary, itwould be sufficient to state that this truly comprehen-sive view would not only explain our species’ originand present status but also provide an action base forthe future. Concerning the perspectives that existtoday, diffusionism, Marxism, structural functionalism,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, PRACTICING176

processualism, and feminism perspectives must bemodified in order to be grounded within this evolu-tionary perspective. Their particular focus wouldenrich the appreciation for the history of our species.As for the poststructionalism and postmodernismperspectives, unfortunately there is no hope. Theirown inadequate and futile theory condemns theirrelationship with science. These theoretical malignan-cies must be removed from anthropology (science).

In adopting an active and pragmatic stance asdepicted with evolutional dynamics, each of the tra-ditional areas of anthropology would benefit. In thearea of physical and applied anthropology, communi-cation among biology, psychology, primatology,chemistry, and physics could procure advancedmethodologies in the examination of physical evi-dence. Under these circumstances, the evidence givento science can not only construct our species’ phylo-genetic past but also aid in the pursuit of justice in thepresent day. As for archaeology, communication withphysics (geology) and computer science (technology)could aid in new methods for the acquisition ofnew evidence for scientific evaluation. This evaluationof archaeological artifacts, based on psychological andsociobiological factors, could provide a solid processedview of our species’ material history. Similar to thisprocess, linguistics would also benefit. In the area oflinguistics, communication with psychology, cogni-tive science, and computer science could open newgrounds concerning the development and dynamicsof human language. As for the new biocultural anthro-pology, the social arm of anthropology, communica-tions among the areas of biology, psychology,cognitive science, sociobiology, and primatologycould provide new and relevant sources of informa-tion concerning the development and developingfactors of culture. Furthermore, the adopting postureof pragmatism could further benefit those anthropol-ogists who want to promote social change. However,all these areas or subdisciplines must communicatewith each other to provide a comprehensive view ofour species.

In the final analysis, one of the greatest contri-butions from anthropology is the evolutionaryframework proposed by Charles Darwin. With theprocurement of scientific advancements (genetics),the genesis of the evolutionary theory must reflectfuture dynamic contributions. To secure a coherentgrand theory, the metaphysics by which the disciplineoperates must be adequately responsible for answering

the essential features of our own humanity. Currently,the evolutionary perspective offers the greatestadvantage; however, a refinement and synthesis musttake place. In this manner, philosophical anthropologybecomes a necessary factor. Open to many possibilities,the advantages of evolutional dynamics serve to unitethe field that would otherwise have to capitulate dueto the improper implementing of metaphysical con-cepts. With such adaptation, the discipline of anthro-pology will survive and thrive, as does our species.

— David Alexander Lukaszek

See also Biological Anthropology and Neo-Darwinism;Darwin, Charles; Evolution, Human; Evolutionary Epi-stemology; Functionalism; Postmodernism; Structuralism

Further Readings

Bernard, A. (2000). History and theory in anthropology.New York: Cambridge University Press.

Birx, H. J. (1991). Interpreting evolution: Darwin &Teilhard de Chardin. Amherst, NY: PrometheusBooks.

Flew, A. (1989). An introduction to Western philosophy:Ideas and arguments from Plato to Popper. London:Thames & Hudson.

Martin, M. (1990). Atheism: A philosophicaljustification. Philadelphia: Temple UniversityPress.

Mayr, E. (1991). One long argument: Charles Darwinand the genesis of modern evolutionary thought.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Wilson, E. O. (2000). Sociobiology: The new synthesis.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Vitzthum, R. (1995). Materialism. Amherst, NY:Prometheus Books.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, PRACTICING

Practicing anthropology primarily refers to anthro-pological work performed outside academia toaddress issues in areas such as community develop-ment, agriculture, health care, environment, resourcemanagement, housing, criminal justice, marketing,and technology. Although a majority of practicinganthropologists work in urban or other local settings,some work on international projects, especially in

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, PRACTICING 177

development and health. Practicing anthropologistscan be employed by a university, but most hold posi-tions in public and private sectors where they studycommunity-related problems, help develop programsand policies, and implement solutions.

Historical Context

In 1941, Margaret Mead, Eliot Chapple, and othersfounded the Society for Applied Anthropology(SfAA) in response to the growth of applied anthro-pology, which the SfAA defines as the applicationof anthropological perspectives through interdisci-plinary scientific investigation of human relation-ships for solving practical problems. Originally a partof American Anthropological Association (AAA),SfAA became a separate entity to avoid traditionalanthropology’s undercurrent of bias against appliedor practicing anthropology. By the 1950s, appliedanthropology was generally regarded as an academic,research-based subfield of cultural anthropologyintended to inform policy, program administration,intervention, and development. Practicing anthro-pology, conversely, did not burgeon until the 1970s,spurred by an extreme shortage in academic positionsin the United States, and by recognition of the poten-tial for anthropologists beyond basic research in apply-ing anthropological knowledge to help solve humans’critical problems as practitioners of anthropology.

The National Association for the Practice ofAnthropology (NAPA) was created in 1983 as a sec-tion of the AAA in acknowledgement of the growth ofthe practicing field. NAPA membership currentlyexceeds 700, and NAPA supports practicing anthro-pologists in public and private sectors, as well as thoseaffiliated with academic institutions, whether or notin anthropology departments. It also promotes prac-tice-oriented work by publishing the NAPA Bulletinand practitioner directories, sponsoring professionalmentoring, networking opportunities, workshops,and interest groups around common themes, andassisting in the establishment of local practitionerorganizations (LPOs) across the United States.Current LPOs include the Washington Associationof Professional Anthropologists (founded in 1976),the High Plains Society for Applied Anthropology(founded in 1980), the Mid-South Association ofProfessional Anthropologists (founded in 1983), andthe Southern California Applied Anthropology Net-work (founded in 1984). These associations have

successfully advanced the position of nonacademicpractitioners within the discipline and professionallyas witnessed in the AAA’s moving toward creating anew category for those members employed by organi-zations that would be similar to accommodationsgranted academic departments.

The actual term practicing anthropologist was notin common use until the appearance of the SfAA’sjournal Practicing Anthropology (PA) in 1978, a publi-cation originally intended for individuals withnonacademic employment. Eventually PA sought toestablish practicing as part of the anthropology disci-pline and to bridge the gap between practicing innonacademic and academic settings. It is still debatableas to whether there is a difference between appliedand practicing anthropology, since both employanthropological means to study societal, organiza-tional, or programmatic issues, and to help facilitatechange by influencing policy and practice. ShirleyFiske considers practicing as virtually interchangeablewith applied in that both serve as testing grounds fortheory of traditional anthropology subfields. Otherscontend that practicing is broader than appliedbecause it incorporates all nonacademic anthropo-logical work, not only the policy research of appliedsignificance. Still others make a distinction betweenthe two by describing the applied work of thoseemployed in business and agencies as practicing andsimilar work of academically employed as applied.Robert Hinshaw views practicing as primarily sepa-rated from applied by being collaborative, while ErveChambers relegates practicing to an element of applied,distinct only in its explicit intent to make anthropol-ogy useful through collaborative inquiry, knowledgetransfer, and decision making.

The blurring of the distinction between appliedand practicing is evident in the fact that the member-ships of the SfAA and the NAPA overlap substantially.NAPA is also a frequent co-sponsor of the annualmeetings of the SfAA and has participated in a jointcommission comprised of representatives from SfAA,AAA, and NAPA. If the discipline itself were to make adistinction, it would probably be that applied work isprimarily concerned with producing knowledge thatwill be useful to others, while practicing work directlyinvolves anthropologists’ intervening beyond social-scientific inquiry, making their knowledge and skillsuseful and easily accessible. Despite the lack of consen-sus on a precise definition, practicing is a recognizedarea of anthropology, having become institutionalized

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


through its increased relevance in professional realmsand the establishment of professional associationsand affiliated publications.

Because the academic employment crisis of the1970s has not yet abated, anthropology programs areaware that increasing numbers of graduates are beingemployed in positions outside of universities. Thegovernment and private sector now offer more jobopportunities for anthropology graduates with amaster or doctoral degree than academic institutions.It is now common for doctoral students to contem-plate future applied or practicing work as well as anacademic position while progressing through theirstudies. Simultaneously, graduate programs withapplied anthropologists on faculty are becomingmore attractive to prospective students. There arenow at least 25 applied anthropology programs in theUnited States, several of which focus their graduateprograms on training future anthropologists fornonacademic work, and many that offer a master’sdegree. In 2000, the Consortium of Practicing andApplied Anthropology Programs (COPAA) wasestablished as a cohort of university departmentsinvolved in applied anthropology to foster profes-sional exchange among faculty and to develop work-shops for professionals and educators. It also assistsstudents in finding professional opportunities inpracticing domains through securing internships andpracticums and supplying information on trainingfor careers in applied and practicing anthropology.

Domains of Practice

One must look beyond job titles to find the rolestaken by practicing anthropologists. Unless the posi-tion is academic, job announcements rarely use theterm “anthropologist”; however, many nonacademicpositions are well-executed by practicing anthropolo-gists. At the same time, anthropologists may have toprecisely define what they bring to the job, in contrastto professionals from other disciplines. A survey con-ducted by NAPA in 2000 of those with master’s-leveltraining in applied anthropology found that practic-ing job categories included (in descending order bynumber of responses) government, private, educa-tion, and other sectors, and archeology, medical,development, and environment substantive areas.The NAPA Web site offers a list of Areas of Practicethat details even more settings in which practicinganthropologists work: agricultural development,

environmental policy and regulation, product designand program management in business and industry,software and database design in computer science,human factors engineering in information technol-ogy, cultural resource management, curatorial activi-ties in museums, forensics in law enforcement, andnonprofit and social service work, including manage-ment and policy implementation and grant writing.

Typical Roles

Practicing anthropologists often play multipleroles. The most common include researcher, researchanalyst, evaluator, impact assessor, needs assessor,planner, change agent, advocate, culture broker, infor-mation specialist, administrator, and manager. Thera-pist and expert witness roles are rare but have alsobeen a part of practicing anthropology. Other rolesinclude educator and consultant: anthropologistshave long been involved in personnel training (forexample, the cross-cultural training of administra-tors, managers, or other social scientists in anthropo-logical techniques such as social impact assessment)and have frequently performed long- and short-termconsulting.

According to the 2000 NAPA survey of master’s-level graduates in applied anthropology, more than30% of respondents reported having researcher occu-pational roles. Practicing anthropologists working asresearchers use their training in data collection tosupply information to analysts and decision makers,but they may also operate as research analysts andpolicy makers. In fact, contributing to analysis elevatesthe status of practicing anthropology and enablesanthropologists to have an impact on decision-making.Thus, practicing anthropologists can participate inthe entire policy-making process—research perfor-mance, data analysis, and finding-based decisionmaking. Practicing anthropologists may also use theiracumen as specialists involved in program implemen-tation and evaluation. These roles require skills inresearch design, data collection, quantitative andqualitative analysis, personnel supervision, and writ-ing. As evaluators, practitioners assess the outcomesof a project or program that has been implementedand determine its impact on a community. The 2000NAPA survey showed that 31% of members usedevaluation skills on the job, which indicates that theevaluator role is common among practicing anthro-pologists. Possible areas of employment for evalua-tors include education, health care, human services,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, PRACTICING 179

and community development. Impact assessors usuallywork on the front end of a project, researching waysa community might be affected by alterations in itssurroundings (for example, zoning changes, newdevelopment projects, or highway construction).Areas such as energy development, fisheries and waterresource management, and transportation may requireresearch and impact assessment.

Practicing anthropologists also work as agents ofchange who attempt to transform a community,sometimes on behalf of a development agency andoften through new technology introduction. This canbe as simple as showing villagers in a remote area howto build a well for a ready supply of water, or as com-plicated as helping a community deal with relocationand resettlement because of dam construction. Inmany roles, an anthropologist may be considered achange agent or may become one after fruitfulresearch leads to advocacy. Advocacy can be ananthropologist’s only role or an important part ofother roles, since it is often the impetus for anthropo-logical participation. Anthropologists involved inadvocacy serve as liaisons on behalf of a communityor group because the latter are often not accustomedto dealing with the agencies that offer them servicesor have power over them.

Culture brokers also serve as liaisons between twodiverse groups, but their communication is alwaystwo-way, from community to decision makers andvice versa. Because of the inherent capacity for con-flict in such situations, anthropologists as culturebrokers strive to act as neutral mediators, with alle-giance to the solution of the present problem ratherthan the particular interests of one group over theother. This role may involve helping public healthofficials better understand a particular ethnic clientelewhile assisting community members in comprehend-ing proposed health intervention. Culture brokersmay favor one side, especially in situations in whichloyalty is tied to a shared heritage with the particulargroup being served, but ultimately the anthropologistin this role is responsible for assisting both parties inmaking a transition.

Performing as culture broker is often not the soleposition of a practicing anthropologist; it may ariseconcurrently with other roles, such as public partici-pation specialist. These specialists provide expertinput in the planning process to disseminate infor-mation to the public through town hall meetings ormedia outlets. For example, a culture broker may

work as a liaison between Native American tribes andthe federal government in handling policy or legalissues, tenure and land use negotiations, and programsubsidies, while simultaneously informing localsabout incentives or opportunities, and policy makersabout needed programs or project adjustments.

Program services and planning are broad rolesthat may include media anthropologists, who maybe public participation specialists working in broad-casting or media production as “translators” of culturalknowledge, informing media outlets on news storiesfrom the expert perspective of an anthropologist.This is an example of the trend within anthropologyof practitioners being called upon to communicatetheir knowledge and expertise in the public spheremore often. Such expanded roles require considera-tion of improving training of new practitioners.

As the employment opportunities for practicinganthropologists in new work settings increase, anthro-pologists are increasingly occupying positions ofauthority as administrators and managers, settinggoals, supervising others, delegating tasks, and allocat-ing resources. In many instances, practicing anthro-pologists have advanced in a natural progression fromtheir research, evaluation, or planning policy rolesto high-ranking positions as key decision makers ingovernment and public administration or corporateexecutive ranks. Others work in academic settings inadministrative rather than faculty roles, often direct-ing applied or practicing units that serve universitiesin community outreach efforts. An evaluator of ahospital’s nutrition program may easily slide intothe role of liaison, media specialist, public relationsrepresentative, assessor, or administrator with all theworking knowledge required for planning, policydecision making, and budgets and staff management,as well as clientele interaction. This advancementreflects the success of anthropological training,the effectiveness of its methods, and the relevanceattributed to practicing anthropology.

Skills Required for Practice

Practicing anthropologists need substantial train-ing in ethnographic research to be able to effectivelycollect community and group-level data. Quantitativeskills, including statistical analysis, are invaluable forpracticing and academic anthropologists. Similarly,grounding in social science research for fieldworkbeyond ethnography, such as sampling, surveyresearch, and computer-aided analysis, is essential.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


In addition, globalization and the corollary emergenceof transnational and international nongovernmentalorganizations , government agencies, and corporations,combined with the inherent collaborative and interdis-ciplinary nature of practicing anthropology, requiresthat practicing anthropologists have strong communi-cation skills for information dissemination, collabora-tion, and funding requests through grant proposals.

Finding a mentor already working in a chosen fieldcan help direct a student to the additional trainingneeded for success in that realm. Informal and formalnetworking is of the utmost importance for practic-ing anthropologists on the job, and should also be aroutine part of anthropology education. Networkscan be formed or enhanced through professionalassociations, online forums, and other means used toconnect with colleagues within, and outside of,anthropology. Developing professional relationshipsnot only prepares students for finding employmentand offers a knowledge base, but also engenders skillsin the collaborative work one should expect in anypracticing anthropology career. Collaboration shouldnot be considered an innate ability, but one thatrequires practice and training through education andexperience. Communication, networking, and collab-oration are desirable components of graduate train-ing in anthropology that can be garnered throughpractical experience. Faculty projects, various insti-tutes and programs already in place, and contributingtime to volunteer organizations such as the PeaceCorps, UNICEF, the World Bank, and local grassrootsgroups or neighborhood associations are opportuni-ties for such experience prior to graduation. As bothstudents or working professionals, practicing anthro-pologists require field-specific knowledge, whichcan be achieved by keeping up with relevant books,journals, newsletters, and other trade publications;networking with practitioners from a particular fieldof interest; and studying domain-relevant laws, poli-cies, and regulations.

Professional Conduct

An essential aspect of professionalism is ethicalconduct. Practicing anthropologists must realize thatanything they do or say may have positive or negativerepercussions on people’s lives. The ability to makeprofessional judgments must be developed. Actionsand words must be carefully scrutinized; choicesmust be informed. Anthropologists must be able toovercome potential conflicts in their roles, particularly

when they feel compromised by client wishes andcannot base their decisions on science alone. To safe-guard ethical decision making on the practitioner’sbehalf, a professional framework must be built toguide sound judgments and to help balance science,morality, and client interests. This framework shouldconsider the ethical guidelines of professional associ-ations (AAA, SfAA, and NAPA), and related laws andpolicies such as those provided by InstitutionalReview Boards, the U.S. National Research Act of1974, and field-specific mandates such as theNational Environmental Policy Act of 1969.

The direction of research and timelines of fundedwork are typically controlled by the sponsoringagency; likewise, findings and field notes are propri-etary, rendering study subjects vulnerable to publicdisclosure. To reduce these risks, professional conductdemands incorporating informed consent andthoughtful consideration of the impact the researchmay have on the client, the study subjects, the anthro-pologist, and the discipline of anthropology. Adheringto ethical guidelines assures the reputation of anthro-pologists everywhere, while failure to do so can seri-ously undermine the discipline as a whole. This is theprimary responsibility facing practicing anthropolo-gists—to positively transform communities and indi-viduals through anthropological means, ethically,with consideration for all parties involved.

— Satish Kedia

See also Anthropology, Careers in

Further Readings

Bushnell, J. (1976). The Art of PracticingAnthropology. In M. V. Argrosino (Ed.), Do appliedanthropologists apply anthropology? (pp. 10–16).Athens: University of Georgia Press.

Chambers, E. (1996). Practicing anthropology.In D. Levinson & M. Ember (Eds.), Encyclopedia ofcultural anthropology (pp. 1009–1014). New York:Henry Holt and Company.

Fiske, S., & Chambers, E. (1996). The inventions ofpractice. Human Organization, 55(1), 1–12.

Hinshaw, R. H. (1980). Anthropology, administration,and public policy. Annual Review of Anthropology,9, 497–545.

Price, L. J. (2001). The mismatch betweenanthropology graduate training and the work livesof graduates. Practicing Anthropology, 23(1), 55–57.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, SO CIAL 181

Sabloff, P. L. W. (2000). NAPA Bulletin 20-Careers inanthropology: Profiles of practitioneranthropologists. Arlington, VA: AmericanAnthropological Association.

van Willigen, J. (1987). NAPA Bulletin 3-Becoming apracticing anthropologist: A guide to careers andtraining programs in applied anthropology.Arlington, VA: American AnthropologicalAssociation.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, SOCIAL

While anthropologists in the United States developedcultural anthropology, the British developed socialanthropology. In the present, despite the fact thatsocial anthropology departments still exist in GreatBritain and in other parts of the world, social anthro-pology existed as a distinct discipline only from theearly 1920s to the early 1970s. Historically, socialanthropologists rejected evolutionary anthropologyas speculative rather than scientific and tended tostudy a society at a particular moment in time. Socialanthropologists focused on social organization, par-ticularly on kinship. Until recently, they did not dealwith history and psychology as much as culturalanthropologists did.

Bronislaw Malinowski (1884–1942) and A. R.Radcliffe-Brown (1881–1955) were the two mainfigures to develop social anthropology. Malinowskideveloped the functionalist approach, and Radcliffe-Brown developed structural functionalism. Influencedby French sociological thought, social anthropolo-gists looked at social institutions. In particular, EmileDurkheim’s (1858–1917) organic view of societyinfluenced social anthropology. This approach des-cribed society as an organism, in which the differentparts of the society work to maintain the society. Thisled to a holistic approach, which said that you couldnot look at any institution in society in isolation fromany other institution. Social anthropology took holdin the British Empire. It also developed as a special-ized discipline in parts of the United States, particu-larly at the University of Chicago.

Malinowski developed the method of socialanthropology, ethnography, during World War I,when he did intensive field research in the Trobriand

Islands of Melanesia for 2 years. Intensive fieldwork,where the anthropologist lives among an exoticpeople, became a hallmark of social anthropology.Malinowski’s functionalism focused on human bio-logical and social needs, ideas that followed those ofW. H. R. Rivers (1864–1922). He said that people hadprimary needs for sex, shelter, and nutrition and thatpeople produced culture to satisfy these needs andother needs that resulted from these primary needs.While his theory has lost popularity, his fieldworkmethod has become standard in anthropology.Malinowski wrote many books based on his fieldwork,the most famous of which is Argonauts of the WesternPacific (1922). Early works based on Malinowski’sapproach included Raymond Firth’s We the Tikopia(1936) and Reo Fortune’s Sorcerer’s of Dobu (1937).Later scholars criticized such ethnographies becausethe better they explained a particular aspect of societyin relation to the whole society, the harder it becameto compare that aspect cross-culturally.

Radcliffe-Brown’s structural functionalism usedDurkheim’s ideas to a greater degree than Malinowski,and Radcliffe-Brown suggested social anthropologyshould be called “comparative sociology.” He got hisideas of social structure from Lewis Henry Morgan,Henry Maine, and his teacher W. H. R. Rivers.Radcliffe-Brown developed a more organic function-alism than Malinowski. He made the analogy thatpeople of a society are like the parts of a human body.Social anthropologists who followed this analogytalked about kinship systems, political systems, eco-nomic systems, and other systems, which all workedto maintain a society’s social structure. They wroteabout how each of these systems influenced oneanother, and when one changed, the others wouldchange as well. Thus, some social anthropologiststalked about how witchcraft beliefs are linked tosocial control, and, as Durkheim said, what religionyou belong to correlates with the chance you willcommit suicide. Examples of ethnographies pro-duced that combined Malinowski’s fieldwork methodwith Radcliffe-Brown’s theoretical approach includeGregory Bateson’s Naven (1936) and E. E. Evans-Prichard’s Witchcraft, Magic, and Oracles Among theAzande (1937).

Early social anthropologists focused on social rela-tionships in terms of social statuses and social roles.Social statuses are the different positions a personholds in a society. Each society has different socialstatuses a person can hold in a society, and there are

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, SO CIAL182

behaviors associated with these statuses. Social rolesare the behaviors associated with social statuses. Theyinvolve how people relate to each other in terms oftheir status, such as how a father relates to hischildren, a supervisor relates to her staff, or a chiefrelates to his followers. As people react together inrelation to social roles, they define their social rela-tionships. Social anthropologists discovered socialrelationships by looking at how people said theyshould relate to each other and observing how theyrelated to each other in everyday life.

Henrika Kuklick points out another aspect of socialanthropology; it was tied to colonial rule, and thisinfluenced how people wrote ethnographies. Mostsocial anthropologists described the societies theystudied as harmonious and static. Social anthropolo-gists for various reasons usually concentrated on egal-itarian societies and wrote how in such societiesconsensus was the rule. She uses Evans-Pritchard’swritings on the Nuer to make this point, noting thatEvans-Pritchard’s accounts show that some Nuerprophets had considerable power and leopard-skinchiefs also had power but Evans-Pritchard downplaysthis power. She says that the British anthropologistsdownplayed this inequality because they were alsodownplaying the oppression caused by their own rule.

In the 1940s and early 1950s, the focus of socialanthropology changed to the study of social structure,the relationship between groups. Major works of thisperiod were The Nuer (1940), by E. E. Evans-Pritchard,and African Political Systems (1940), which was influ-enced by classification systems by Lewis Henry Morganand Henry Maine. In The Nuer, Evans-Prichard took amore cultural view than most earlier social anthropol-ogists, since he said structures were cognitive maps ofsociety, not actual social relationships. Then in themid-1950s, some social anthropologists began to paymore attention to how society changed. This wasreflected in the approach of Edmund Leach, who wasinfluenced mostly by Malinowski, and in the conflictapproach of Max Gluckman, who was influencedmostly by Radcliffe-Brown and Karl Marx. Majorworks that came out during this period were EdmundLeach’s Political Systems of Highland Burma (1954),and the work of Gluckman’s student, Victor Turner,Schism and Continuity in African Society (1957).

After this period, the influence of Malinowski andRadcliffe-Brown began to decline as social anthropol-ogists turned to the structuralist ideas of Claude Levi-Strauss, and later the ideas of Americans like David

Schneider and Clifford Geertz, who looked moreat culture than society. And Americans were exposedto ideas of social anthropology as social anthropolo-gists like John Middleton, Victor Turner, and MaryDouglas all came to teach in universities in the UnitedStates. Finally, theorists like Foucault and Derridainfluenced both social and cultural anthropologists.Today, many American universities say they teachsociocultural anthropology, and social anthropolo-gists now deal with culture as much as society.

— Bruce R. Josephson

See also Anthropology, Cultural; Ethnographic Writing;Evans-Pritchard, Edward; Functionalism; Malinowski,Bronislaw; Radcliffe-Brown, A. R.; Rivers, W. H. R.; SocialStructures

Further Readings

Beattie, J. (1964). Other cultures. New York: Free Press.Bohannan, P. (1963). Social anthropology. Holt,

Rinehart & Winston.Erickson, P., & Murphy, L. (1998). A history of

anthropological theory. Peterborough, Canada:Broadview Press.

Kuklick, H. (1991). The savage within: The socialhistory of British Anthropology: 1885–1945.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kuper, A. (1996). Anthropology and anthropologists:The modern British school (3rd ed.). New York:Routledge.

Stocking, G. (1995). After Tylor: British socialanthropology 1888-1951. Wisconsin: University ofWisconsin Press.

ANTHROPOLOGY AND SOCIOLOGY

Studies of anthropology and sociology haveblended together as cultural anthropologists haveattempted to draw comparisons among varioussocieties and cultures. Identifying culturalcharacteristics became more difficult during the20th century in response to two world wars. By thebeginning of the 21st century, globalization hadfurther blurred the once distinct lines between

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, SO CIAL 183

particular cultures, as the affairs of nations becamemore intertwined with those of others.

One area where anthropology and sociology havejoined forces is in the study of refugees.Approximately 140 million people entered the ranksof refugees in the 20th century. Many refugees lefttheir homes because of war and political violence.Others relocated to escape nature’s wrath asdroughts, floods, tidal waves, and earthquakesravaged their homelands. Studies have revealed thatabout 90% of all refugees remain in the first areaof relocation. While large numbers of refugees,particularly those who leave voluntarily, will beassimilated into the cultures of their adopted lands,others will remain in refugee camps in tents orbarracks, creating new cultures that blend elementsof the old with the new.

After World War I, the newly formed League ofNations oversaw the relocation of refugeesdisplaced by the war. The end of World War IIwitnessed a shift in this responsibility to theDisplaced Persons Branch of the SupremeHeadquarters Allied Expeditionary Forces. The lives,rights, and basic needs of refugees were thereafterprotected by international law. In 1951, theresponsibility for refugee oversight again shiftedwhen the United Nations High Commission forRefugees (UNHCR) was created at the GenevaRefugee Convention. By the early 21st century,UNHCR was responsible for some 17 millionrefugees around the world, mostly from Africa andAsia. Many of the refugees under UNHCRprotection are children unaccompanied by adults.These children present new challenges to culturalanthropologists who study them, as well as to theagencies responsible for their welfare.

After both World War I and World War II, anumber of scholars in various disciplines turnedtheir attention to refugee studies as they attemptedto develop a framework of research that wouldaffect policy decisions. In 1939, the publication of aspecial issue on refugees in the Annals of theAmerican Academy of Political and Social Scienceserved to focus attention on the legitimacy ofrefugee studies as a scholarly endeavor. In 1950,during the post–World War II years, the Associationfor the Study of the World Refugee Problem wasfounded in Liechtenstein, followed by the creationof UNHCR the following year.

In 1981, International Migration Review issued acall for comparative, interdisciplinary studies onrefugees. Seven years later, the Journal of RefugeeStudies was founded to provide a comprehensiveforum for scholarly research in the field. Since itsinception, 22.5% of the contributors to the Journalof Refugee Studies have been anthropologists, and18% have been sociologists. That same year, inresponse to increased interest in refugee studieswithin anthropology, the American ArchaeologicalAssociation established the Committee on Refugeesand Immigrants as a subgroup of the GeneralAntiquity Division. Over the next 6 years, thenumber of anthropologists involved in refugeestudies increased significantly.

— Elizabeth Purdy

SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY

Originating in Bronislaw Malinowski’s works, social(or cultural) anthropology studies the cultural livesof the diverse populations of the world in all theiraspects, thus using figures, methods and theoriesfrom archaeology, folklore, ethnography, andlinguistics in its analyses. Social anthropology isincreasingly differentiating itself from physicalanthropology, which focuses instead on biologicalcharacteristics and traits.

Social anthropology brings together differentdisciplines to analyze the cultural life of humanbeings and cultural differences between differentpeoples. The first focus of the discipline was oncultures and people that remained exotic andprimitive to Western eyes. Early anthropologistswere all Europeans or North Americans, thus thedistance between the observer and the observedbecame a characteristic feature of the discipline.Because of the anthropologists’ whiteness,anthropology has often been charged withethnocentrism. Today, the focus of socialanthropology has become more inclusive.Researchers study not only primitive peoples livingin small villages but also urban groups and cultures.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, SUBDIVISIONS OF184

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, SUBDIVISIONS OF

Anthropology may be best viewed as the comparativescientific study of human societies and culturesthroughout the world and throughout time. Thisseems to appropriately summarize the nature ofanthropology and the depth of the ability of this dis-cipline to provide a holistic approach to the study ofhumankind. Anthropology is comparative in that itattempts to understand both similarities and differ-ences among human societies today and in the past.We study our species from its beginning severalmillion years ago right up to the present. This ispossible because anthropology has taken a holisticapproach, dividing into several subdisciplines, each

unique in their ability to address aspects of humanityand each contributing to each other in order tocreate a more complete picture of humans through-out time.

There are four subdivisions, or subdisciplines, inanthropology: cultural anthropology, archaeology,physical (biological) anthropology, and linguisticanthropology. These four subdivisions allow anthro-pologists to study the total variety present in ourspecies. As a discipline, anthropology studies every-thing about being human and therefore betterenables us to understand the origins and develop-ment of who we are today. For humans, it is veryimportant to us to understand where we come from.Many societies have origins myths, and for anthro-pologists, studying ourselves is like writing the storyof our origins.

Cultural Anthropology

Cultural anthropology deals with the origins, history,and development of human culture. Cultural anthro-pologists often, although not always, tend to studygroups that have different goals, values, views of reality,and environmental adaptations that are very differentfrom those of themselves. Cultural anthropologistsnote that culture is learned and that it is throughculture that people adapt to their environments;therefore, populations living in different places withdifferent environments will have different cultures.Much of anthropological theory has been motivatedby an appreciation of and interest in the tensionbetween the local (particular cultures) and the global(a universal human nature or the web of connectionsbetween people in distant places).This allows us todevelop a concept of human nature very differentfrom the research other disciplines provide.

Also called ethnographers, cultural anthropolo-gists are known for producing ethnographic works(or holistic descriptions of human culture, based onextensive fieldwork). These works traditionally havefocused on the broad description of the knowledge,customs, and institutions of a particular culture group.More recently, however, cultural anthropologists havealso examined the ways in which culture can affect theindividual and his or her experience. Cultural anthro-pologists stress that even though the behavior ofpeople in different cultures may seem silly or mean-ingless, it has an underlying logic that makes sensein that culture. The goals of cultural anthropology,

Yet the first topic of anthropology has clearlyinfluenced the way it relates to other disciplines andits ambition to be able to come to validgeneralizations on cultural and social changes. Theagenda of achieving a total description of a givensociety clearly derives from the small-scaleobservations of early anthropologists, who examinedsimpler societies where changes were slower. Theinclusion of modern societies as an anthropologicalfield of study has brought the discipline increasinglyclose to sociology.

During the second half of the 20th century, theexpansion of anthropological objects of study hasalso coincided with the emergence of non-Westernanthropologists. In addition, there has been asteady growth of anthropology institutes anduniversity departments in Eastern countries, such asJapan and India, as well as in some Latin Americannations. However, the establishment of newinstitutions has not always entailed appropriatefunding, so that researchers have remained limitedto the countries’ own heritages. The status ofcultural anthropology today, however, remainsambiguous. Different schools of social anthropologyoften coexist in the same country, and thediscipline still has not attained that unity oflanguages and concept that would give it the statusof the science of culture.

— Luca Prono

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, SUBDIVISIONS OF 185

therefore, serve to make sense of seemingly bizarrebehavior in terms of the people practicing the behav-ior. Cultural anthropologists are often thought of asstudying people in faraway, exotic places. More oftenthan not, cultural anthropologists tended to studynon-Western groups, especially during the earlydevelopment of this subdiscipline. Today, however,cultural anthropologists also focus on the subgroups(or subcultures) within Western culture. Each ofthese groups is a part of a larger culture and can helpus to better understand the human condition. Evenresearch on our own society attempts to uncover thelogic behind how we behave.

Archaeology

Archaeology can be defined as the study and inter-pretation of past societies and cultures from the earli-est of times to the present. By excavating sites createdby humans in the past, archaeologists attempt toreconstruct the behavior of past cultures by collectingand studying the material culture remains of peoplein the past. Using these remains to understand thepast can be a real challenge for archaeologists becausethey have to infer past lifeways from what is some-times considered trash. Archaeologists have to lookat what people left behind. Archaeologists are onestep removed from people; they have access only totheir “things.” The advantage of archaeology is timedepth; archaeologists can go back millions of years,often studying cultures that are long gone and haveno analog in the modern era. Using this diachronicapproach, archaeologists can look at how cultureschange over time.

In addition to its value as a scientific subdisciplinein anthropology, the knowledge gained througharchaeology is important to cultures and individuals.The past surrounds us; the past defines individuals, aswell as cultures. For some, it may seem of little conse-quence; for others, it is their very identity as a people.Every culture has symbols that it uses to remind itselfof the past, and archaeology is a critical way of know-ing about that past.

Physical (Biological) Anthropology

Physical, or biological, anthropology focuses on thestudy of biological aspects of human beings, past andpresent. Physical anthropology is essentially a biolog-ical science; it often seems to have more in common

with biology than with the other subdivisions ofanthropology. The importance of this subdisciplinein anthropology, however, is its contribution to theholistic understanding of humans. Physical anthro-pologists focus on both the biological nature of, aswell as the evolution of, humans. By studying pri-mates, physical anthropologists are able to contributeto our knowledge about the evolution of our ownbehavior. Examining fossil hominids allows physicalanthropologists to study and understand the evolu-tion of humans as a distinct species. Human variabil-ity is another major focus of physical anthropology;physical anthropologists are concerned with humanvariation, such as the differences in hair and skincolor, the differences in blood types, the relationshipbetween behavior and health, as well as the dis-tribution of genetic traits. Using knowledge gainedthrough such studies contributes to increased healthand the decreased spread of diseases.

Linguistic Anthropology, or Linguistics

Linguistics is the study of language. Although linguis-tics is classified as a subdiscipline of anthropology,it often tends to be a discipline of its own, especiallyat large universities. The task of linguists is to try tounderstand the structure or rules of a language. Theylook for different grammar systems and different waysfor producing sounds as a way to understand thelanguage, which potentially sheds insight on culturalbehavior. Because language is often used as a way ofcategorizing people and as the primary way throughwhich culture is learned, linguists can help tracerelations between people in the present and past.Linguistics also contributes to archaeology by helpingto decipher ancient text through the rules of themodern language. The contributions of linguisticsto anthropology are undisputed.

Each of these unique subdisciplines in anthropol-ogy contributes different aspects to the understand-ing of humans in the past and present. Rather thanfocusing on a single aspect of being human, such ashistory or biology, anthropology is distinct in itsholism. These subdisciplines provide the basis for thisholistic approach.

— Caryn M. Berg

See also Anthropology, Cultural; Archaeology; BiologicalAnthropology; Linguistics, Historical

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, THEORY IN186

Further Readings

Angrosino, M. V. (2002). Doing cultural anthropology:Projects for ethnographic data collection. ProspectHeights, IL: Waveland Press.

Boyd, R., & Silk, J. B. (2005). How humans evolved(3rd ed.). New York: Norton.

Erickson, P. A., & Murphy, L. D. (2003). A history ofanthropological theory (2nd ed.). Peterborough,Canada: Broadview Press.

Fagan, B. M. (1999). Archaeology: A brief introduction(7th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Feder, K. L. (2000). The past in perspective: Anintroduction to human prehistory. Mountain View,CA: Mayfield.

Nanda, S., & Warms, R. L. (2004). Culturalanthropology (8th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Stein, P. L., & Rowe, B. M. (2003). Physicalanthropology (8th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, THEORY IN

As the science of humankind, anthropology strives togive a comprehensive and coherent view of our ownspecies within material nature, organic evolution, andsociocultural development. Facts, concepts, and per-spectives converge into a sweeping and detailed pic-ture of human beings within earth history in generaland the primate world in particular. To give meaningand purpose to both evidences and ideas, theoreticalframeworks are offered.

Influenced by the critical thinkers of the Enlighten-ment and ongoing progress in the special sciences,especially the writings of Charles Darwin (1809–1882)and Karl Marx (1818–1883), the earliest anthropolo-gists were evolutionists. Our biological species, pastand present societies with their cultures, and lan-guages were seen as the outcome of evolution.

In physical/biological anthropology, the humananimal is compared to the prosimians, monkeys,and apes. Fossils and genes link our species to thefour great apes (orangutan, gorilla, chimpanzee, andbonobo). DNA evidence substantiates our very closerelationship to these pongids. Furthermore, humanbeings are seen as the result of hominid evolution interms of emergent bipedality, implement making,and a complex brain capable of using symbolic lan-guage as articulate speech. Of course, interpretations

of the hominid fossil record differ among anthro-pologists, as do the taxonomic classifications of theunearthed specimens and explanations for the successor extinction of hominid species and their activities.

Anthropologists have interpreted social behaviorsand material cultures from different theoreticalorientations: evolutionism, historical particularism,diffusionism, structuralism, functionalism, configu-rationalism, and relativism (among other theoreticalapproaches to understanding and appreciating societiesand cultures). Cross-cultural studies reveal both thesimilarities and differences among human groups,resulting in important generalizations.

In the middle of the 20th century, two majoranthropologists were instrumental in reviving theevolutionary perspective: Leslie A. White and MarvinHarris. If used correctly, then the evolutionary frame-work gives meaning and purpose to all the factsand concepts in anthropology. A dynamic inter-pretation of our species, societies, and cultures is instep with the scientific findings in modern geology,paleontology, biology, sociology, and psychology.Overcoming postmodernism and with a growingawareness of global convergence, the forthcomingneo-Enlightenment will return to science, reason,and critical realism.

Theories in anthropology deal with the origin ofour species, the development of societies and theircultural elements (for example, technologies, kin-ship systems, and magico-religious beliefs andpractices), and the emergence of symbolic languageas articulate speech. New areas of specialization inapplied anthropology include forensic anthropology,forensic psychology, multiculturalism, and actionanthropology.

As a comprehensive discipline, anthropology hasbeen and remains open to relevant facts, concepts,and theories from the other sciences, for example,ecology, climatology, social psychology, and naturalphilosophy. More discoveries of fossil hominid speci-mens and their artifacts, as well as more precise DNAanalysis techniques, will set limits to the number ofprobable explanations for the evolution and diversityof humankind. No doubt, new light will be shed onprehistoric migrations and historic wars.

Combining scientific knowledge with philosophi-cal reflection, anthropologists may even speculate onthe future directions of human biosocial evolution.Until now, anthropologists have focused on ourplanet. However, in the years to come, new areas of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, VISUAL 187

biosocial research will emerge as human beings adaptto life in outer space and on other worlds.

— H. James Birx

Further Readings

Barnard, Alan. (2000). History and theory inanthropology. New York: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Boyd, Robert, and Richerson, Peter J. (2005). Theorigin and evolution of cultures. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

McGee, Jon, & Warms, Richard L. (Eds.). (2000).Anthropological theory: An introduction (2nd ed.).Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.

Moore, Jerry D. (2004). Visions of culture: Anintroduction to anthropological theories andtheorists (2nd ed.). Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMiraPress.

Perry, Richard L. (2003). Five key concepts inanthropological thinking. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Prentice Hall.

4 ANTHROPOLOGY, VISUAL

The Need for Visual Anthropology

Since the advent of modern photographic technology(still and moving), the use of visual methods foranthropological documentation and inquiry has beenan integral part of the discipline, although it was notformally known as visual anthropology until afterWorld War II. Visual anthropology has been used todocument, preserve, compare, and illustrate culturemanifested through behaviors and artifacts, such asdance, proxemics, and architecture. As well, archaeol-ogists and primatologists have respectively employedvisual methods in their research to capture images ofelevations and excavations, and individuals and theirbehaviors. While critics of visual anthropology citethat it is unscientific in method, only serves to illus-trate written ethnography, and does not propose the-oretical positions, visual anthropology today is ameans for seeing and presenting anthropologicalthinking in its own right. Over time, visual methodshave evolved to foster new research questions andanalysis, redefining how visual researchers approachthe study of culture.

Visual anthropology, whether photographed,taped, filmed, or written, is a method of observation,but more important, it is a means for developingquestions and analyzing data. Visual anthropologistsprovide their observations for other anthropologistsand social scientists to consider in their own work,presenting an alternative way of seeing culturethrough the lens, which instigates only furtherinquiry, not certainty. By embracing collaborationbetween observer and observed and recognizing therelationship between the visual and textual, visualanthropologists have created theoretical objectivesthat redefine the boundaries of the subdiscipline,exploring new ways to study and understand culture,society, identity, and history. These are the character-istics that separate visual anthropology from docu-mentary film, photography, and journalism; andthese are the issues that will promote the use of visualmethods in the anthropology of the future.

This entry will discuss several facets of visualanthropology, noting its origins, its significant influ-ences, its current status, and given new innovations intechnology, where it will be in the next decade. Whileimportant to the evolution of the subdiscipline, thisentry will not discuss, analyze, or compare in detailethnographic films, filmmakers, or their histories andinstead will suggest a number of books dedicated tothis subject at the end of the piece. Two examplesfrom my own research serve to illustrate differenttypes of photo-elicitation methods, recognizing thatthese techniques would be impossible to conductwithout significant developments in technology andanalysis. Inexpensive cameras, faster films, ubiquitousphoto-minilabs, more powerful laptop computers,and the digital revolution have facilitated the use ofphotography and video in the field. Not only canresearchers accomplish more, but they can place tech-nology in the hands of the subjects themselves.Furthermore, with Internet access, researchers canimmediately distribute data and edited material fromthe field to share with colleagues, students, and themainstream public.

Visual Methods

In the late 19th century, anthropologists employedphotography and filmmaking as tools to augmenttheir research, as a means for illustration, description,and preservation of people they observed. Althoughrudimentary, bulky, clumsy, and sometime dangerous,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOLO GY, VISUAL188

photographic equipment found its way to the fieldwith the express purpose of quickly gathering accu-rate information about the local population. BaldwinSpencer, Alfred Cort Haddon, Félix-Louis Regnault,and the Lumière brothers were among the first ethno-graphers to employ photographic cameras in theirresearch. From 1922 through 1939, governmentanthropologist Francis E. Williams made thousandsof glass plates and negatives of the people in 18 differ-ent cultural groups in the Australian colony of Papua(New Guinea). Although Franz Boas had used a stillcamera since the 1890s, it was not until late in hiscareer, 1930, that he employed filmmaking to capturevarious activities of the Kwakiutl for documentingbody movements (dance, work, games) for his cross-cultural analysis of rhythm. Similarly, Margaret Meadand Gregory Bateson relied on photographs and filmas visual tools in their research, because they felt thattheir images could explain behavior more clearly thanthey could describe it. Bateson shot hundreds of pho-tographs and hours of film, which they analyzed andpublished, arguing that their anthropological under-standing of the cultural context in which the imageswere made recognized the linkages between theaction and the deep cultural meaning of the images.

Ethnographic film, video, and photography remainthe primary methods of visual anthropology as ameans to record visual phenomena and obtain visualdata. Using qualitative methods, one may seek data toinvestigate a particular question or seek a questionfrom a set of data. In visual anthropology, one mayfilm a topic of interest or make images and discernpatterns and questions from them. Today, visualanthropology spans the spectrum of inquiry andanalysis, from materialistic perspectives and positivistanalysis to symbolic interpretations and informantparticipation. The former is represented in ethno-graphic works capturing culture in situ. Like synchronicslices of life preserved on celluloid, the footage islater used for teaching, documentary, and scientificresearch. From this point of view, the lens is objective,capturing behavior for preservation, description, andaccuracy. At the other end, the most humanistic level,visual anthropology questions the material, the sub-jects, and the investigators themselves, as an experien-tial nexus of culture and reflexivity. Moving awayfrom a literal or textual description of visual expres-sion requires a shift to thinking about culture throughimages themselves. In this case, the visual becomes amedium through which to enhance knowledge and

develop questions that are not possible otherwise.To accomplish this task, the methodology extendsbeyond the researcher herself and invites the infor-mants to participate in the work itself. Visual anthro-pology explores visual phenomena and visual systemsin the process of cultural and social reproduction.With that in mind, the anthropologist must be opento all visual material, behaviors, and interactions andrecognize that by capturing them on film, they inher-ently modify the content and context of the messageand must question their own role in the process inwhich they are a part.

Within anthropology, ethnographic films are themost popular form of cultural description. Usuallyshown in classes as teaching aids, anthropologistshave relied upon visual material to bring indigenouscultures and behaviors to the classroom so thatstudents can glimpse “the other.” In the 1950s and1960s, the Peabody Museum at Harvard funded filmprojects to collect material on cultures from aroundthe world, with the intent of having researchers viewthese films in lieu of traveling to the field. In this case,as well as others, the use of film to depict culture isladen with the biases emphasizing their interestsrather than focusing on the subjects’ priorities. Forthis and similar reasons, ethnographic film has beencriticized for its colonial heritage, citing how film-makers maintain power over what and who they rep-resent. For example, governments with colonies inAfrica and Asia sponsored filmmakers to depict thelives of natives in their colonies. These films wereshown to their citizens in support of governmentprograms to civilize the “savages” and bring themWestern values and beliefs.

Filmer, Filmed, and Audience:The Triadic Relationship

The positivistic mode of making anthropologicalfilms and photographs requires researchers to positionthemselves as objectively as possible. Critics argue thatsuch objectivity is nullified by subconscious culturalprejudices. When conducting research, one must rec-ognize the inherent triadic relationship between thefilmmaker (photographer), the filmed (subject) andthe audience (viewer). Although as anthropologists,we want to be culturally relative when we enteranother culture, our biases affect how we see thepeople we live with and the work we conduct.Reflexivity is the recognition of when and how

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


researchers apply their cultural filters to their obser-vations and fieldwork. In turn, as anthropologists, weare influenced by our notions of who will review ourwork, that is, the audience (graduate committees,colleagues, popular media, informants, family, and soon). Who we have in mind as audience affects ourapproach to the final product. We must also considerthe relationships between the anthropologist and thesubject (observer/observed), as our biases will colorthe way we portray the subject in print or on screen.The final leg of the triad is the relationship between thesubject and the audience. As informants, who do theyexpect to read the work or see the resulting images? Asan audience member, the understanding we alreadyhave about the subject affects our perspective of thefilm. Because there is no direct interaction betweenaudience and subject, the anthropologist becomes themediator and wields significant responsibility.

However, with innovations in digital and filmequipment, it has become easier to give or loan equip-ment to subjects and have them film their lives. Eithermeans has validity, although it depends upon one’srelationship with the subject and one’s objectives forthe research. Photo-elicitation has become a commonmethod today because it pivots on the idea of partici-pation. By removing the anthropologist from behindthe camera and asking the informants to film theirlives and events (or working with images peoplealready have), it reassigns the roles of filmer and thefilmed and actuates a dialogue between the two.Participant ethnography is an attempt to divert powerto the subjects so they can represent themselves to anaudience the way they feel is best. Photo-elicitationcapitalizes on position and perspective to enhanceethnographic data while respecting the subject’sposition.

For example, during my early fieldwork in Bolivia,my informants occasionally asked me to photographobjects, people, or events for them, even though Ibelieved these images did not fit into my scope ofresearch. I neglected their perspectives because Iwas too influenced by what I thought made a “good”photograph as well as my own research initiatives.Eventually, I realized that by taking photos oftheir interests, I was tapping into information thatexplained more about them and respected their wishfor photos. Later, I gave cameras to these same infor-mants to take photos of their own subjects so wecould discuss them. When reviewing their photos,they explained their lives in terms I would not have

otherwise understood. Other times, they commentedthat they took a photo because they thought Americanswould like to see certain aspects of their lives, illus-trating their own preconceived ideas about my cultureand their audience.

Photo-Elicitation

Social scientists conduct elicitation by showing theirinformants photographs or other visual media inorder to obtain the informants’ views of reality basedupon their interpretation of the images. Such infor-mation may be new to the research or confirm whatthe researcher may already know. Photo-elicitationseeks to discover how cultural informants experience,label, and structure the world in which they live.However, this technique is affected by the photos theresearcher presents, depending very much upon hisor her own perspective when taking and editingthe photos.

By recognizing the triadic relationship between theobserver, the observed, and the audience, the visualanthropologist discovers how content and contextaffect the communication process. However, simplyhanding someone a camera, which he may never haveused before, in order to express himself does not ade-quately remove the Western bias from the project. Insome cultures, individuals’ view of media may be quitedifferent than the anthropologist’s. Participation willalso require the ethnographer to listen and understandthe means through which their informants best expressthemselves (e.g., art, dance, theater, or oratory.)

There are minimally four types of photo-elicitationtechniques that are employed by visual researchers:

1. Photo-elicitation directed at ascertaining the ethno-meanings and ethno-categories of subjects directedat their material cultural environments, and objectsor things: photo surveys of homes, stores, parties,families, and others (see the following example ofthe Rutucha, first hair cutting).

2. Photo-elicitation directed at the examination of themeaning of behavior and/or social processes centralto the lives of our subjects.

3. Photo-elicitation based on environmental portraiture,which explores the social conditions under which par-ticular groups of individuals live and most often triesto explore the meaning of their membership in a com-munity (see “24 Horas de Puno” following).

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


4. Photo-elicitation that more explicitly explores asubject’s own sense of social self and biography,through either contemporary photographs and/orhistorical images that can be used to trace develop-ment of self and biography as perceived by thesubject.

In the following ethnographic examples, I illustratehow different photo-elicitation techniques wereemployed to glean information about relationships,perspectives, customs, and beliefs.

The Andes: Examples ofVisual Anthropology in Action

For the past 15 years, I have conducted visual ethno-graphic research in two urban centers in the AndeanAltiplano (Peru and Bolivia). Photography is my pri-mary means of gathering empirical data, which I alsouse for eliciting information from local residentsabout their lives as migrants. Specifically, I havefocused on how migrants’ health care decisions reflecttheir sense of community. In the early 1990s, I livedwith Alvaro Quispe and his family in an impover-ished, peripheral neighborhood (barrio) in the city ofEl Alto, Bolivia. El Alto sits above the capital of La Pazand sprawls across the Altiplano, as it is home formore than 500,000 people, many of whom aremigrants who work in the capital below. Over the pasttwo decades, Aymara migrants have moved to El Alto(and La Paz) to improve their economic well-being byseeking employment and education. Due to financialconstraints brought about by agrarian reforms, col-lapse of the tin industry, and various governmentprograms (military, health, and education) peoplehave flocked to El Alto to make a better life for them-selves, in hopes of improving their opportunities andbetter supporting their families.

In El Alto, my camera equipment and photographsbecame points of conversation and contention formyself and my neighbors. Some barrio residentsvehemently requested that I not take their photosbecause I may misuse or sell them. However, severalof the same individuals later asked me to makeimages of their families, as a recuerdo or keepsake.Taking photographs of family members (especiallythe elderly) became a means for learning more aboutfamily histories and their migration stories. Some-times I made multiple copies so images could be sentback to the campo (countryside) to share, while they

kept one for their wall at home. Others sought myphotography as a means to document an event,specifically weddings, high school graduations, bap-tisms and rutuchas (first-hair-cutting ceremonies).Around the barrio, I became known as “the gringo whotakes photos,” which was a good moniker, becausepeople knew I could give them something in returnfor the many questions I asked, and they understoodthe role of a photographer, much better than that ofan anthropologist.

By taking photographs of events, I provided myneighbors a service that they could not otherwiseafford. They invited me into their homes to makeimages of people or special events, and in return Igave them a stack of photographs, which I could dobecause of the minilabs in the city. I intentionallydid not frequent churches or other venues with mycameras where local photographers made a living,but instead depended on word of mouth to be invitedto photograph various events around the barrio.

My images created a wide variety of reactions fromthe families, most of which were positive. Whenreturning photos to a family, everyone would gatheraround and pass the photos between themselves,laughing out loud and making comments about theirappearance. I noted which images created the mostdiscussion and further inquired as to what the photosmeant to them. For the most part, residents enjoyedseeing themselves on paper, because “being pho-tographed made them feel important.” Frequently,I initiated informal interviews about the people andthe subjects of the photos, to glean an understandingof how they interpreted the images, viewed the event,and were related to the people attending. As I discov-ered, migrants’ sense of community was not definedby the geographical space they lived in, but rather thesocial contacts they maintained, often reflected in theimages of those they invited to their parties andevents. Two distinct occasions illustrate the methodas well as the utility and serendipity of approachingresearch with a camera in hand.

Rutucha: The First Haircut

Within the first 2 months of my research in El Alto,Alvaro invited me to participate and photograph his3-year-old daughter Cristina’s baptism and rutucha.Although these two separate events do not alwaysoccur on the same day, the Andean rutucha incorpo-rates the Christian baptism, reflecting the influence of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


colonial traditions as they both serve to present thechild to the society at large.

The baptism was held on a Saturday morningin the Rosario Catholic church in a considerably“middle-class” Aymara neighborhood down in LaPaz. Immediately following the service, the rutuchatook place at Alvaro’s family’s home up in El Alto. Atthis church, many baptisms are held on the same day,so after several other ceremonies were performed,Cristina’s name was read aloud by the officiant. Alvaro,his wife, and their daughters, the godparents, Srs.Vallejo, and I walked to the baptismal font located atthe crossing of the nave and transept. Acknowledgingmy presence, the Father nodded when I asked to takemore than one photo. I documented the ceremonyand the celebrants, fulfilling Alvaro’s wish to capturethe moment on celluloid. Afterward, both the god-parents (fictive) and immediate (consanguinial) kinposed for photos on the church steps. However, oncewe reconvened at the family’s house in El Alto, thenumber of guests multiplied fourfold, and my dutiesas photographer and anthropologist significantlyincreased as well.

In El Alto, guests announced their arrival at therutucha by lighting small packets of firecrackers andtossing them to the ground. The loud, rapid burstssummoned Alvaro and his wife Silvia to answerthe door and invite their guests inside. Upon enter-ing, guests brought with them a case of beer andexchanged the customary greeting with the hosts,involving a friendly hug, a handshake, and anotherhug. Alvaro’s nephew noted each guest’s name andthe number of cases given to his aunt and uncle, sothey would later know how many cases to reciprocateat the next special occasion. The guests placed con-fetti on Alvaro and Silvia’s heads, designating theirposition as sponsor of the festivity. Along with thebaptized daughter, I too became the focus of guests’attention, having confetti thrown all over me andmany comments made about my appearance, cam-eras, and ability to speak Aymara. Besides theirinquiries and observations, I was frequently invited topartake in the free-flowing beer and hard alcohol,noting to always “ch’allar” or pour a bit on the groundbefore taking a sip. The ch’alla is a ritual offering ofrespect for and a sharing of the beverage with thePachamama, or Mother Earth. Around the courtyard,the men stood while their wives and other women saton wooden benches, both groups drinking, smoking,and talking. Lunch consisted of sajta de pollo (chicken

picante) and a half-dozen different varieties ofpotatoes, which the guests readily devoured. After thenearly 50 guests were sated, the rutucha began.

Alvaro set a large wooden table in the middle ofthe courtyard and draped a colorful handwoven cloth(manta) on top. Still in her white baptismal dress,Christina’s mother placed her on the table betweena few bottles of beer and woven wool bags (ch’uspa).Scared by everyone crowded around her, the childcovered her face with a small stuffed animal she heldin her hand and nibbled on a slice of orange with theother. Sr. Vallejo, her godfather, addressed the family,remarking on what fine parents she had and howhonored he was to be associated with them for therest of their lives. Compadrazco relationships, or god-parenthood (fictive kin), are important for migrants’urban survival, as the godparent relationship solidi-fies access to resources the migrants may not haveotherwise. Alvaro followed his compadre’s speech bytoasting his guests, who were seated and standingaround him in the small dirt courtyard. After otherguests toasted the child and her family, Alvarohanded me a large pair of scissors. “As the godfatherof the rutucha,” Alvaro pronounced, “it is your dutyto invite these guests to cut Christina’s hair. Theirgenerosity will reflect their level of commitment toour family. As a foreign friend, you bring prestigeto all of us here today.” When originally asked toparticipate in the rutucha, I had assumed it wouldbe only to take photos, not solicit the neighborsfor cash on behalf of the daughter. I had not expectedto become the sponsor or “padrino de la rutucha,”but I was seen as a resource, and it was their wayof formally establishing a relationship with me thatwould benefit them and their need to survive.Compadrazco ties solidify trust between the parties,which ultimately leads to relationships as strong asblood (consanguinial) ties.

In my capacity as “padrino” I cut a lock of hairfrom Christina’s head and placed it and a Bolivianonote in the ch’uspa behind her. Then, I offered thescissors to Alvaro’s brother, Javier. The group scoldedme for first asking a family member, and then sug-gested that I invite one of Alvaro’s neighbors whomI had recently met. Ruben took the scissors and cut alarger patch of hair off of the child’s scalp. Now Cristinabegan to cry and was comforted by her parents whileeveryone else chuckled. As the afternoon turned toevening, each guest had cut Christina’s hair two ormore times, resulting in a very disheveled coiffure,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


and stuffed bags of money, which they said would gotoward her education.

In the Andes, women take pride in their long,thick, black hair, usually braided in two long strandsthat hang down below their waist. Women’s hair con-notes their femininity, and their hair care and stylingare important to their formal appearance. After herrutucha, Cristina had only short patches of hair, andalthough only 3 years-old, she understood what itmeant to be without her hair. From that point onwardfor the following few months, Cristina was embar-rassed to go outside with her boyish haircut and worea floppy hat to cover her bald head.

Two days following the rutucha, I gave my photosto Alvaro and Salome. Immediately, they sat downand looked through them all, passing the imagesbetween themselves and the other family memberspresent. Laughing and pointing, we relived the partytogether. At that time, I did not understand the valuethese images would develop for Alvaro as well as myresearch. For my friends, the images were more thansimple keepsakes, but rather represented a tangiblerecord of their hospitality and networks within thebarrio. As for my research, the images both docu-mented a cultural ritual and became keys for conver-sations with local residents, as I gave copies of theimages to the neighborhood residents. The imagesstimulated discussions to verify names, explain rela-tionships, compare occupations, identify politicalaffiliations, and recall geographic locations. Womenwho looked at Christina’s rutucha photos alwayscommented on how her short hair made her appearlike a boy. At subsequent rutuchas I attended whileliving in El Alto, I asked a friend to videotape the ritu-als, which we copied for the families and viewedtogether. Like the photos, the video elicited a greatdeal of information about the participants, their rela-tionships with each other, and the ritual itself.

One afternoon 16 months later, Alvaro and Ireviewed Christina’s rutucha images, casually siftingthrough more than 100 photographs I had taken thatday. I recognized everyone who had been there,because by that time I had had other experiences withseveral of them beyond this event. In retrospect, Iunderstood why Alvaro had invited them to his homethat day and how they fit into his life in El Alto. Theimages revealed his definition of “community,”because he held those persons in confidence or sharedsimilar political beliefs with them. After months ofdissecting what community means to Aymara

migrants by observing their health care decisions, theimages made within the first few months of my stayillustrated how community manifested itself politically,socially, and locally, but it took me that long to recog-nize their underlying message. In reviewing thehundreds of images I made for people in El Alto,it became clear that the common denominator forcommunity is trust, and while trust cannot be pho-tographed, photographs do capture people’s associa-tions in their formal and informal environments.

A different experience illustrates how photo-elicitation can be an effective method when con-ducted by a group focused on one purpose.

24 Horas de Puno:A Participatory Photo Project

In 2003, I was teaching anthropology courses at theNational University of the Altiplano in Puno, Peru,when I recognized a useful application of photo-elicitation. Resources being few, I had to figure outhow the students in my visual anthropology coursecould afford to conduct their semester-long projectand collect enough material to complete it by the endof the term. Since the class was populated withstudents from the city of Puno as well as other provin-cial villages, I modified the concept of Photovoice,a participatory photo-elicitation method, to create aproject for the entire class. Photovoice promotes socialchange through photography by asking people torecord and reflect on their community by usingimages to stimulate discussion within and beyond thegroup itself. My interest for the class, and for research,was to engage the students to think about the city ofPuno from their own perspectives and experience. Asa resident or migrant, what was important to themabout the city? How could they make photos thatexpressed such a view? However, this would not be anongoing process, because I placed a temporal as well asgeographical limit on their exploration. They wouldonly have 24 hours in which to take their photographsof Puno, and they could not venture beyond the citylimits. These restrictions made them think about themundane aspects of life in Puno, instead of recreatingthe popular image it holds as a tourist town.

The students spent a majority of the semesterpreparing themselves by studying photography,reading various anthropology texts, practicing theirnote-taking and interviewing skill, and viewing ethno-graphic films. As a class, they also began discussing

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


which places around the city would be best to photo-graph at various times of day, outlining strategiesfor covering as much of the city as possible. With alarge map of Puno, they divided the urban region into15 sectors. Students created groups of two and choseat least 4 sectors to explore on foot. The day we wouldconduct the project held little culturally significantmeaning to anyone, so it represented “any day” in thelife of Puno. Several other people besides the studentswere invited to participate, including several Aymara-and Quechua-speaking migrants, colleagues, andfriends so they too could add their view of what Punomeans to them.

Beginning at 6 a.m. one November day, the groupsspread out across the city and photographed Punofor 24 hours. After spending two hours in theirchosen sectors, the teams returned to our centralheadquarters and wrote notes about their observa-tions and experiences. Upon completing their notes,teams returned to the streets but to different sectorsto continue the process. Some participants choseto photograph in the afternoon and through thenight, instead. As their instructor and the sponsorof the project, I provided the film, processing, andall meals.

Within the 24-hour period, 22 photographers shotmore than 2,800 images. The rolls were collected,processed, and returned within a few hours of beingshot so participants could edit their favorite imagesfrom each roll and augment their notes about thephotos. In all, they wrote more than 100 pages ofobservations about their experiences in the sectors,which they could refer back to once the final editoccurred. From each roll, participants selected theirbest three images, noting the frame number on theenvelope. Two days later, we placed the selectedphotos on tables by sector. Everyone voted on thephotos by placing small stickers near the 25 imagesthey thought best represented Puno. When all of thevotes were cast, 46 photographs stood out as mostrepresentative of the groups’ understanding of life inPuno. Their group decision abated individual biasabout the images and instead became a reflection ofhow all of the participants envisioned life in Puno, adistribution that did not represent the “best” photosby my standards, but instead those images that par-ticipants identified with as being relevant in the dis-course about life in their city.

The photographers whose images were selectedwere asked to write 8 to 10 sentences about each

photo they took, referring back to their notes andincluding data about the time, place, and subject.More important, they described why they felt theimage represented life in Puno and how they specifi-cally related to the subject. After the selected photoswere enlarged, matted, and framed, they were dis-played with the appropriate text at the university, andlater at the mayor’s office in the city center.

The spontaneity of the photography was balancedby the participants’ decisive organization and imple-mentation on where, when, and how to visit eachsector. Most revealing were the interpretations par-ticipants wrote about their images based upon theirearlier notes and observations. As one may presume,there were fundamental differences in approachestoward the photographs themselves, as locals tendedto document places or events and noted specificnames and people. Migrants’ photos and commen-taries, on the other hand, presented a much moreabstract perspective of the city. For example, onefemale resident took a photo of a man in a hospitalbed with his son standing to the side. She describedhis illness, length of time in the hospital, his progno-sis, and that it made her sad to see so many sickpeople in the hospital. On the other hand, a migrantmade an image of a shoeshine boy working in anesplanade and explained how this vocation repre-sents the bottom rung on the work ladder for boyswho venture to the city to find a better life. He didnot mention a name or place, but instead dictated/wrote (in Aymara and translated to Spanish) aboutthe process of finding work in the city as a boy andthe progressions migrants go through in order tomaintain sources of income. He concluded bystating, “I took the photo to show what it takesto live in the city.” The general pattern of the imagesdemonstrated that migrant photographers driftedtoward abstract subjects and explanations, while theurban residents focused on specific aspects of citylife. Their perspectives reflected similar dichotomiesin the urban/rural divide and surprised the partici-pants when these were pointed out to them.

Overall, the participants embraced the project,taking ownership of the work and responsibility forhow they presented their ideas to a larger audience. Asa public exhibit, the participants interacted with thegeneral populace by describing their visions of Punoand creating a discourse so others could also reflecton the city they live in. More important, the audiencereacted to the contrast between locals’ and migrants’

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


perspectives, noted in their visual expressions andcomments as they browsed the exhibit. Soon after,I scanned the images and shared them with mystudents in the United States via the Internet, expand-ing the audience another degree.

The Value of Visual Anthropology

Although they share similar interests in people, visualanthropologists are neither journalists nor documen-tarians. The ethnographer is someone who estab-lishes and maintains a unique relationship withinformants and develops an understanding of theculture within which they live. Furthermore, whilethe resulting images may document and describe thepeople and cultures where they live, the anthropolo-gist sees patterns and asks questions of the imagesthemselves—not simply asking informants for com-mentaries, but seeking deeper meaning within thebody of work to develop a theoretical understandingof human behavior. In this case, photos are data,and they are a record of life and people that can bereviewed and analyzed by the researcher, who under-stands the context in which they were taken andrecognizes the content they illustrate. Moreover, theycan be interpreted by many different people, to solicitvarious reactions. Perhaps the slippery nature ofinterpretation alienates visual anthropology from themore popular written discipline. While photojournal-ists may spend time with their subjects and broachmeaningful and deliberate themes, telling a storyand developing behavior theory are ultimately notthe same endeavors.

Visual anthropology brings to the discipline aunique, sometimes difficult way of understandingculture. While written and filmic data are editedbefore distribution, only the researcher understandsthe context and content in which the notes andimages were made. Unlike field notes, which fewanthropologists publish, placing images in the publicrecord invites others to criticize the analysis and con-clusions, interpretations that the researcher may notnecessarily agree with or desire. Because images areinterpreted in multiple ways, anthropologists hesi-tate to make analysis of their meanings and insteadprefer to use photos or film exclusively for descrip-tion. At this point, visual anthropology must redefineitself by transcending the political nature of what itrepresents and establish new strategies for engagingwith the world.

The value of the visual exercise lies in its ability todocument and preserve, but most important, in itsinherent character of combining knowledge withexperience to ask questions of the information con-veyed to reach a more profound understandingof the people involved with the research. As a scien-tific endeavor, visual anthropology continues toprobe and explore the relationships between people,illustrating their behaviors and objects, which conveya sense of who they are and their worldviews, butsuch practice must also acknowledge its position inthe process.

New Directions in Visual Anthropology

With the advent of new technologies and innovationsthat make the world “smaller,” visual anthropologywill lead the discipline to an image-based discourse.As more machines (for example, digital cameras,video and audio recorders, handheld computersand satellite phones) become available to capturemovement, behaviors, environments, and objects,researchers will employ these technologies to facili-tate their work. The World Wide Web, e-mail, instantmessaging, Power Point presentations, and otherinteractive media will transform the one-way streetof researcher to colleague/student/classroom—to adiscussion between them as the research unfoldsand analysis ensues. Internet technology will bringabout classroom participation in research andteaching, making the “other” tangible by enablingsubjects to be “online” and accessible even whenanthropologists are not in the field. However, such aperspective unfortunately applies only to the mostdeveloped countries and ignores the people in theworld who have never even used a phone, much lessa computer. As more powerful, lighter, and inexpen-sive hardware becomes available, researchers willexperiment with its offerings and produce work thatexpands the boundaries of what we consider visualanthropology.

As technology evolves, the use of the image willalso change, not only in format but also in meaning.Images and content will become more arbitrary, blur-ring the lines between “truth” and observation, visionand experience. Knowledge gleaned from images willtherefore be less reliable, but more available, and thepotential for learning and experiencing cultureincreases, while its validity decreases. Visual anthro-pology will either become more of the language of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


anthropology or continue being the subdisciplinethat only other visual researchers take seriously. Toovercome the inherent bias toward text-based anthro-pology, visual researchers must change the languageof knowledge to one which emphasizes nonverballevels of understanding and develop alternativeobjectives and methodologies that will benefitanthropology as a whole. In other words, visualanthropology must provide more than accompanyingillustrations and sequence-style films, and developtheories not only obtainable through visual media,but applicable across the discipline. Technologyaccounts only for the tools to define visual anthropol-ogy’s future; students and researchers alike mustrecognize that anthropological communication isfounded in observation and that visual methodsallow them to describe and discuss culture in waysthat complement and expand our understanding ofthe human condition.

— Jerome Crowder

See also Ethnographer; Ethnographic Writing; Fieldwork,Ethnographic; Participant Observation

Further Readings

Banks, M., & Morphy, H. (Eds.). (1997). Rethinkingvisual anthropology. New Haven, CT: YaleUniversity Press.

Crawford, P. I., & Turton, D. (1992). Film asethnography. New York: Manchester UniversityPress.

El Guindi, F. (2004). Visual anthropology: Essentialmethod and theory. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta MiraPress.

Grimshaw, A. (2001). The ethnographer’s eye: Ways ofseeing in anthropology. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Loizos, P. (1993). Innovation in ethnographicfilm: From innocence to self-consciousness1955–1985. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.

MacDougall, D. (1998). Transcultural cinema.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Pink, S. (2001). Doing visual ethnography: Images,media, and representation in research. ThousandOaks, CA: Sage.

Ruby, J. (2000). Picturing culture: Explorations of filmand anthropology. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress.

VISUAL ANTHROPOLOGY

Visual anthropology is a growing branch ofanthropology that has not yet achieved a fullyinstitutionalized status. The union of visual andanthropological elements has so far produced avast terrain of contested discourses and multiplehistories that are so varied in content, method,and quality that they are not easy to reconcileunder a single definition, or to encompassunder a single theory. In general terms, visualanthropology promotes the use of visual materialssuch as film, video, photography, and computer-based multimedia for the description, analysis,communication, and interpretation of humanbehavior. It also examines visual representationsof different cultural aspects and how imagescan be analyzed as artifacts of culture. Historicalphotographs, for example, are considered as asource of ethnographic data. These two areas ofstudy have dominated the discipline. Otherbranches of visual anthropology also consider thestudy of native media and their personal, social,cultural, and ideological contexts and the displayof anthropological productions in classrooms,museums, and television.

Much of the debate in visual anthropology hasdeveloped about the status of the image. In thepast, social scientists considered images asobjective evidence and have relied on the accuracyof the camera in recording the surrounding reality.Yet anthropologists have become increasinglycritical of this supposed objectivity. Images, such asa photograph or photogram of a documentary film,are not simply transparent windows on the world,but are socially and politically constructed. Despitetheir social construction, however, images can stillprovide information on a given culture. They can beused to preserve cultural details and as a way ofdistancing the anthropologist from the object ofstudy: Through them, the pictured reality isrendered anthropologically strange.

Visual anthropologists now argue that imagesare always concerned both with the culture of thoserepresented and the culture of those who represent.Anthropologists use visual technology in a reflexivemanner, challenging viewers’ notions about the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOMETRY196

4 ANTHROPOMETRY

Anthropometry is the measurement of the size andproportions of the human body. Anthropometricmeasurements include those of the whole body, suchas weight and stature (standing height). Also, anthro-pometry assesses specific areas of the body, as withcircumference measurements around a body part, likethe arm or skull. Furthermore, specific body tissues canbe estimated through anthropometry. For example,adipose tissue under the skin (subcutaneous fat) can bemeasured by collecting skinfold measurements, whichconsist of skin and fat existing above skeletal muscle.In addition, anthropometric data include variousratios and indices of body dimensions. Such calculatedmeasurements can yield information about the relativesize or shapes of the whole body or its parts. Anthro-pometry has a long history within anthropology, andit has been especially important in the biological andmedical areas of the discipline.

Among the many possible anthropometric mea-surements are stature; weight; circumferences of thehead, chest, abdomen, arm, forearm, wrist, buttocks,thigh, calf, and ankle; lengths of body segments suchas the thigh and calf; breadths across body parts suchas the elbow and hip bones; and skinfolds of varioussites that may have subcutaneous fat, such as beneaththe shoulder blade, next to the navel, at the top of thehip bone, at the back and front of the upper arm, andat the inner and outer sides of the thigh.

Some of the advantages of anthropometric mea-surements are that they are relatively easy to collect,

can be performed with simple equipment, and areobtainable with minimal disruption to those beingmeasured. Moreover, because the equipment neededfor data collection is portable, anthropometric mea-surements can be obtained in a variety of settings,including laboratories, hospitals, private residences,community structures, and outdoor environments.Furthermore, as anthropometric data collection isrelatively inexpensive, it is useful for gatheringinformation from large samples of individuals and/or collecting data at repeated intervals. One of thedrawbacks of anthropometric measurements is thatthey are less precise than more expensive, invasivetechniques. For example, while the anthropometricmeasurement of circumference at the navel is an indi-cation of abdominal size, a computed tomography(CT) scan of an individual at the navel can showthe exact location and quantity of particular kinds oftissues, such as adipose, muscle, organ, connective,and bone.

Particular techniques have been developed toencourage standardization of anthropometric mea-surements. Such measurement guidelines help ensurethat different data collectors are measuring the sameaspects of the body in the same way and at the samereference points. In addition, specific equipment andparticular features of equipment are recommended tofacilitate accurate measurements. For example, theinstrument for measuring weight should be a beamscale with movable weights or an electronic digitalscale. The preferred equipment for measuring statureis a stadiometer, or a vertical, marked rod with amovable platform that contacts the head. For circum-ferences, the tape measure used should be narrow,flexible, and nonstretching, so that measurements arenot exaggerated. Lengths and breadths of body partsor between reference points on the body requireeither an anthropometer, which is a marked rod witha movable, perpendicular attachment, or spreading orsliding calipers, which have movable elements along amarked straightedge.

The anthropometric measurements most techni-cally demanding to collect are skinfolds. For accuracyof results, precise suggestions should be followedregarding how and where to lift the fold of tissue. Themeasurer also needs to know how and where to placethe skinfold calipers, a measuring instrument withpressure-sensitive separating jaws that fit over theskinfold, as well as how to manage the exertion ofpressure from the calipers to take an accurate reading.

reliability of the images and seeking theparticipation of those who are studied inconstructing their representations. So, while theroots of visual anthropology are in the culture ofpositivism, its developments have departed frompositivist assumptions.

Visual anthropologists have often foundthemselves working together with scholars from therelated fields of visual sociology, film, andperformance studies, visual culture, and architecturerather than with fellow anthropologists.

— Luca Prono

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ANTHROPOMORPHISM 197

Single anthropometric measurements can becombined into various ratios and indices to representvaried physical characteristics. For example, severalindices reflecting aspects of the head have been devel-oped. The cephalic index indicates head breadth as apercentage of head length, while the nasal index showsnasal breadth as a percentage of nasal length. Otherindices reflect overall body proportions or shape. Theskeletal index indicates sitting height as a percentageof stature, and the intermembral index denotes thelength of the arms as a percentage of leg length.

Still other anthropometric indices are used to sug-gest overall body fatness or distribution of adiposetissue in the body. For example, the body mass index(BMI), which is the ratio of body weight to staturesquared, is commonly interpreted as an indicator oftotal body adiposity. The ratio of waist-to-hip cir-cumferences is frequently used to suggest relativeupper-body (also termed android) obesity or lower-body (also termed gynoid) obesity. One indication oftrunk fat relative to limb fat is the ratio of abdominalcircumference to arm circumference.

Applications of anthropometry in the study ofbody composition illustrate one of the major uses ofanthropometry within anthropology. In populationstudies, biological anthropologists have used anthro-pometric measurements and indices to assess adiposetissue distribution and overall adiposity. Anthropo-metric data can also be used in prediction equationsto estimate more complex aspects of body composi-tion, such as body density and percentage of body fat.

Anthropometric data are used in several otherways by biological and medical anthropologists. Instudying patterns of disease and mortality, scientistshave investigated connections between anthropomet-ric data such as waist-hip ratio and BMI and risk ofvarious infectious and chronic diseases and death.Furthermore, anthropologists have traced patterns innutritive status of human groups over time throughanthropometric data. Measurements of various bodyparts are valuable in interpretation of human activityhabits, such as the use of certain limbs for a custom-ary activity. In addition, anthropometry has beenused in investigating population trends in growth,such as the changes in stature that have occurred withmigrations between countries varying in affluence.Adaptation to a variety of environmental characteris-tics, such as the differences in stockiness between hot-adapted and cold-adapted groups, has been examinedthrough anthropometry. Moreover, anthropometric

data have important historical and future applicationsin the design of products such as vehicles, furniture,and clothing for businesses and the government.

— Penelope A. McLorg

See also Biological Anthropology; Genetics, Population;Medical Genetics

Further Readings

Gould, S. J. (1996). The mismeasure of man, revisedand expanded. New York: Norton.

Lohman, T. G., Roche, A. F., & Martorell, R. (Eds.).(1988). Anthropometric standardization referencemanual. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics.

WHO Expert Committee on Physical Status. (1995).Physical status: The use and interpretation ofanthropometry. Geneva: World HealthOrganization.

4 ANTHROPOMORPHISM

The term is composed of two words of Greek origin:anthropos (man) and morphe (form, aspect). It definesthe attribution of properly human characteristics tononhuman beings, that is, either divine entities oranimals.

Anthropomorphism of Divinities

In many religions, polytheistic or monotheistic, thedivine was or is believed to possess external or inter-nal characteristics similar to the ones of humans, as itmay be understood by the artistic representations andmythological or sacred books’ tradition.

The first-known thinker who severely criticizedthis attitude was Xenophanes of Colophon (ca570–480 BC). In some of the fragments of his worksthat have been saved, Xenophanes condemnedfamous poets like Homer and Hesiod, who werelooked upon as authorities in mythology, becausethey had presented the Greek gods as full of unaccept-able human weaknesses. He also denounces as purelysubjective self-projections the current beliefs thatmen of his time had about the divine, giving as proofthe fact that the Thracians represent their gods asbeing blue-eyed and red-haired like themselves,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AOTEAROA (NEW ZEAL AND)198

whereas the Aethiopian divinities are Black. To illus-trate even better the absurdness of these humanbeliefs, Xenophanes pointed out that if animals wereable to create works of art like humans, they wouldalso probably depict their divinities with bodieslike theirs.

This critical position against current religiousanthropomorphism was followed afterward by manyGreek philosophers (especially by Heraclitus, Socrates,Plato, Aristotle, the Stoics and the Neoplatonists), whoconceived the divine in a more abstract way.

Anthropomorphism of Animals

In the myths and fairytales of almost all the civiliza-tions that have flourished in every continent, vari-ous species of animals have been used as symbolicrepresentations of one or another typical humanmental or intellectual character (for example, thelion is “the strong and fearless,” the fox is “the cun-ning,” the bee is “the industrious,” and so on). Theseprojections are founded on more or less evidentequivalences between natural behaviors of thesespecies and human attitudes. They were essentiallyused to give educative moral examples (such as theAesopian myths). For some African tribes and forthe Siberian shamans, the establishment of a per-sonal connection between a human being and ananimal believed to have some particular qualitiesmay lead to the acquisition of these qualities by thehuman being.

This common way to project human characteris-tics to animal behaviors influenced many interpreta-tions of animal ethology, which presented themselvesas scientific approaches, from Plutarch (AD 50–125)up to the 18th century. Even the famous French ento-mologist Jean-Henri Fabre (1823–1915) didn’t escapethe attribution of such elements to animal species.

Of course, it is undeniable that humans share somecommon attitudes with the other animal species. Butserious scientific analysis describes these elements ina neutral way, without wishing to use the humanspecies as a “model” or a “measure” for the otherforms of life and taking care not to make easy trans-fers of ethological interpretation from the humans tothe rest of the animal world.


See also Animism; Ethology

Further Readings

Diels, H., & Kranz, W. (1996). Xenophanes. DieFragmente der Vorsokratiker (Vol. I, Sec. 21,pp. 113–139). Zurich: Weidmann.

Eliade, M. (1952). Images et symboles. Essais sur lesymbolisme magico-religieux. Paris: GallimardColl.

Eliade, M. (1974). Le Chamanisme et les techniquesarchaïques de l’exstase. Paris: Payot.

Fabre, J.-H. (1920). Social Life in the insect world(B. Miall, Trans.). London: T.F.U.

4 AOTEAROA (NEW ZEALAND)

Unlike nearby Australia, Aotearoa/New Zealand is nota multicultural society, but rather, according to localterminology, a bicultural society. The two culturesreferred to in this notion are those of the originalindigenous people, the Ma–ori, and an emergingindigenous people, the Pakeha. In te reo Ma–ori, theMa–ori language, pakeha means stranger; the term ispejorative. In practice, Pakeha now refers not tostrangers in general, but rather to New Zealand’snative-born Caucasian majority. Not all members ofthis group use the term pakeha to identify themselves;some prefer the term “Europeans” while others usethe words such as “New Zealander” or “Kiwi.”

These broader terms New Zealander and Kiwi,however, may refer to all citizens or self-identifyinglong-term residents. As such, New Zealand and Kiwimay refer to Ma–ori, Pakeha, Asians (for example,Chinese, Indians, Malays, and some others), PacificIslanders (Cook Islanders, Samoans, Tongans, Fijians,and other Polynesians or Micronesians, but ratherdecidedly neither Ma–ori nor Pakeha). Asians andPacific Islanders and some others, whether citizens orself-identifying long-term residents, do not figure inthe description of Aotearoa/New Zealand as a bicul-tural society.

Ma–ori Figure Prominently in theBiculturalism of Aotearoa/New Zealand

According to Aotearoa/New Zealand’s founding doc-ument, the Treaty of Waitangi, certain northernMa–ori nobles transferred what the English version

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AOTEAROA (NEW ZEAL AND) 199

describes as “all the rights and powers of sovereigntyover their land” to the British Crown; Ma–oriversions generally gloss the English “sovereignty” aste kawanatanga katoa, in which katoa referred tothe nobles, while kawanatanga was a neologismcombining kawana, a transliteration of the Englishword “governor,” and the Ma–ori term tang, meaningapproximately “ship,” as in the English “governor-ship.” Though first written in the treaty, kawanatangahad been developed by missionaries to describe thequalities of Christ transcendent and in heaven towardhis church. The English version assumes not only thesovereignty of the chiefs but also their ownership andcapacity to dispose of land as well as their right toallow strangers to reside upon the land. The legalright of non-Ma–ori New Zealanders to reside inAotearoa/New Zealand rests upon this provision ofthe treaty.

Current legal interpretations of the second articleof the treaty reserve for Ma–ori the right to practicetraditional arts and occupations (for example, fish-ing) without license, as well as, subject to negotia-tions, rights in Crown lands, fisheries, waters, and

lake bottoms. These rights are not held by Ma–ori,either in general or as individuals. Rather, such rightsin specified lands and waters are held by Ma–ori con-sidered as members of iwi and hapu, who are nowbeing compensated for their loss of collectively heldlands and waters during and following the colonialperiod. Iwi and hapu are often somewhat colloquiallyglossed as “tribe” and “clan” or “subtribe,” respectively;iwi translates more literally as “bone.”

In addition, the New Zealand electoral system recog-nizes two sorts of electorate, one for all New Zealandersand permanent residents regardless of ethnic back-ground and a second set of five electorates reservedsolely for Ma–ori who chose to exercise their franchisetherein.

While most public business takes place in English,te reo Ma–ori remains the only language recognized inlaw as an official language. All public institutions arenow formally identified in both English and Ma–ori. Insome formal public circumstances, both Western andMa–ori protocols receive recognition. The nationalanthem is now often sung with a version in Ma–oripreceding the English original. Elements of Ma–ori

Source: © iStockphoto/Edward Tsang.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AOTEAROA (NEW ZEAL AND)200

ceremonial, for example, the haka dance/chantperformed by the “All Blacks” rugby team beforerugby test matches, have become emblematic to NewZealanders of Aotearoa/New Zealand. Most NewZealanders are familiar with and use at least a modestset of Ma–ori words, for example, Aotearoa, meaning“the land of the long, white cloud,” a term referring tothe land of New Zealand.

In bicultural New Zealand, Ma–ori are tangatawhenua, the people of the land/placenta. The equationof land and placentas, both indicative of sources of life,also refers back in part to a still common Ma–ori practiceof burying placentas in the cemetery special to their iwiand hapu, in which the baby’s dead ancestors will havebeen buried and in which eventually the baby should beburied as well. Iwi and hapu, further, gather for formaloccasions on marae (yards) specific to each group; visi-tors as well as persons affiliated with the home groupbut arriving at the marae gate for the first time must beformally welcomed according to the proper protocolsbefore they can come onto the marae and into thewhare (house), which stands upon the marae.

Whare share a standard architecture and red color.The carvings depict significant ancestors of thepeople of the marae. Viewed from the inside, the roofbeams are a woman’s ribs; whare contain the spirit oftheir people.

While all significant activities in Ma–ori life requireboth men and women, the protocols reserve formalspeech at meetings on the marae for men. Notionally,Ma–ori take collective decisions in such meetings witha concern for the effects of those decisions over aperiod of some seven generations. Any decision takenby an assembled group, however, applies only to theiwi and hapu represented at the gathering.

While Ma–ori are indigenous, they are notautochthonous. Most Ma–ori histories tell that Ma–orifirst arrived in Aotearoa from Hawaiki on one of sev-eral waka (canoes), Tainui, Te Arawa, Aotea, Takitimu,and Tokomaru prominently among them. SomeTuhoe tell of their ancestors already being resident inAoetearoa when these waka arrived. The people ofWhangara Marae on the east cape of the North Islandtell of their founding ancestor, Kahuitia te Rangi, alsoknown as Paikea, surviving after his waka sank, andthen arriving in Aotearoa on the back of a whale; hiscarved figure can be seen on the ridgepole of theMarae, while his story has been more recently com-memorated in Witi Ihimeara’s novel Whale Rider andthe film by the same title.

All Ma–ori should be able to recount their ancestryand the significant events of important ancestors’ lives(understood together as whakapapa) back not only totheir ancestors’ arrival in Aotearoa, but including, asappropriate, where on the waka those ancestors wereseated. Knowledge of one’s whakapapa establishes inpart one’s place in Ma–ori society, for example, one’slegitimate membership in hapu and iwi as well as one’srelations with other iwi and hapu. Recently, there havebeen significant attempts to gather information onwhakapapa into databases and to distribute this infor-mation over the World Wide Web.

In fact, many Ma–ori cannot recount their whaka-papa with such exactitude. The reasons for this arevarious. But the most important reasons can betraced to the Ma–ori wars.

Following the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi in1840, the British attempted to assert their sovereigntyover portions of the North Island, notably theWaikato and Northland. To this end, they broughtelements of their armed forces along with some of themost sophisticated armaments of the day fromAustralia to New Zealand. These British efforts failedas Ma–ori leaders improvised solutions, including thefirst instances of trench warfare, to British strengths.

Despite these Ma–ori successes in the northernregions of the North Island, the New ZealandCompany, a private land company organized by theWakefield brothers and certain of their associates,sought to control the purchase of Ma–ori lands byEuropeans. The company subsequently began toadvertise land in New Zealand as being for sale, eventhough the company often did not have legal titleto those lands. People from around the British Islespurchased, or thought they had purchased, lands andthen immigrated to New Zealand. While GovernorGrey sought to limit European migration to the SouthIsland and to the relatively lightly populated portionsof the southern North Island, tensions between Ma–oriand Europeans over land grew, leading to wars inTaranaki and subsequently both the King Countryand the Waikato. Ma–ori were defeated; their popula-tions were decimated; and effective Ma–ori resistanceto British rule ceased, although various revival move-ments would continue to form. British administra-tion fostered attempts to suppress Ma–ori languageand custom; and colonial prejudices encouragedchildren of Ma–ori-European marriages to take upEuropean customs and in some cases to attempt to passas Europeans. Particularly during the 20th century,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AOTEAROA (NEW ZEAL AND) 201

some Ma–ori moved to larger cities and towns, relin-quishing ties to relatives and later knowledge of theirspecific ancestry.

The transformation of Europeans into NewZealanders was not immediate; many Europeans con-tinued to regard one or another portion of the BritishIsles as home, even as, in some cases, several genera-tions were born in New Zealand. In the 1860s,prospectors found gold in Otago. The advent ofrefrigeration meant that New Zealanders could growlamb for the British market rather than just for localconsumption. The European population grew.

A colony and later a dominion of the British Empire,New Zealanders contributed troops to Britain’s armiesduring the Boer and later World War I and II. Alongwith Australian soldiers, both European and Ma–oriNew Zealanders served in the ill-fated assault onTurkish forces at Gallipoli and, later on, Flanders field.Pakeha self-understanding of themselves as NewZealanders and not British began in response to thesebattles, especially Gallipoli. Dominion status gave NewZealand domestic self-government. Writers such asFrank Sargenson, Janet Frame, as well as later bothBarry Crump and Maurice Gee, among many others,began producing short stories and novels about NewZealand subjects for New Zealand audiences; similarmovements occurred amongst painters and latermoviemakers, with Colin McCahon and Jane Campionbeing among the most prominent.

New Zealanders debated for many years the virtuesof accepting independence in 1947 as part of theBritish Commonwealth. They understood that asmembers of the Commonwealth, New Zealand wouldhave privileged access to British markets for its agri-cultural products, notably lamb. As such, Aotearoa/New Zealand was largely unprepared for the UnitedKingdom’s entrance into the European CommonMarket in 1959; overnight, New Zealanders went fromhaving among the world’s highest per capita incomesto being citizens of an economically marginal country;Pakeha and Ma–ori alike found themselves together.

New Zealand had joined with the United Statesand Australia in alliance after World War II. DuringDavid Lange’s Labour government in the 1980s, NewZealand declared itself a nuclear-free zone, thus pre-cipitating a conflict between the U.S. Navy’s policy ofneither confirming nor denying which ships werepowered by nuclear reactors or carried nuclearweapons and New Zealand’s refusal to allow suchgenerators or weapons into its ports.

The Lange government also initiated a series ofeconomic reforms, incorporating policies elsewhereassociated with Margaret Thatcher and RonaldReagan. Locally referred to as “Rogernomics,” thesereforms led to the sale of previously state-owned cor-porations, a move away from full employment, andan introduction of private health insurance in con-junction with the national health system. Competitionand efficiency became the bywords; restructuring andredundancies became common as New Zealand exper-imented with giving market forces the greatest feasibleinfluence, while simultaneously opening their marketto international trade to a greater extent than any otheradvanced economy. In large measure, because of itsrelatively small but well-educated population, NewZealand has also provided international high technol-ogy, especially telecommunications, firms with a marketfor testing innovations prior to their introduction intothe larger European and American markets.

Influenced to some degree by America’s Black pridemovement, against this general background and thatof the deep divisions occasioned by the South Africannational rugby tour in 1981, Ma–ori began a culturaland political revival that continues to this day. As apart of this revival, Ma–ori have reasserted claims toland under the aforementioned terms of the Treaty ofWaitangi; these claims and the Ma–ori revival have alsoevoked ambiguous, sometimes negative, responsesfrom Pakeha. Ma–ori have also revived their language,many of their traditional arts, including carving andtheir martial arts. Furthermore, some Ma–ori havesought to have Ma–ori artifacts, for example mokomakai or tattooed heads, returned to Aotearoa/NewZealand either for inclusion in the collections of TePapa, Aotearoa/New Zealand’s national museum, orto the appropriate iwi and hapu. Ihimeara, Alan Duff,and Keri Hulme, among others, have also added toAotearoa/New Zealand’s emerging national literaturewith novels and stories describing Ma–ori life.

In late 2004, Prime Minister Helen Clark announcedthat she was poised to initiate a discussion within theLabour Party, and Aotearoa/New Zealand morebroadly, concerning the to-date unwritten constitu-tion, the place of the Treaty of Waitangi therein, andthe possibility of Aotearoa/New Zealand’s reestablish-ment as a republic.

— Gerald Sullivan

See also Ma– ori

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE BIO GEO GRAPHY202

Further Readings

Best, E. (1996). Tuhoe: The children of the mist(2 vols.). Auckland, New Zealand: Reed Books.(Original work published 1925)

Duff, Alan. (1993). Maori: The crisis and the challenge.Auckland, New Zealand: HarperCollins.

Kelsey, J. (1995). The New Zealand experiment: Aworld model for structural adjustment. Auckland,New Zealand: Auckland University Press.

King, M. (1985). Being Pakeha: An encounter withNew Zealand and the Maori renaissance. Auckland,New Zealand: Hodder & Stoughton.

King, M. (2003). The Penguin history of New Zealand.Auckland, New Zealand: Penguin Books.

Vaggioli, D. F. (2000). History of New Zealand and itsinhabitants. Dunedin, New Zealand: University ofOtago Press. (Original work published 1896)

4 APE BIOGEOGRAPHY

Evolutionary biogeography addresses the historicalrelationship between geographic space and the pro-cesses of biological differentiation, such as speciationand adaptation. Darwin observed that the evolutionof related species in different locations required thatthey also share a common ancestral location he calledthe “center of origin.” Darwin thought this require-ment was so obvious that it constituted a self-evidenttruth and to call it into question was to appeal to theagency of a miracle. The occurrence of related speciesin different locations, especially those considered tobe separated by geographic or environmental barri-ers, was explained as the result of their havingmigrated away from their original centers of originaccording to their individual abilities to disperse(walking, flying, rafting, floating, and so on). Dispersalability was seen to be the key to geographic distri-bution, and biogeographic evolution was simply acompendium of unique, individual, and unrelateddispersal events. This perspective justified each groupbeing explored in isolation, whether upon the staticgeography of Darwin’s time or the currently acceptedplate tectonic theory of geological history.

Evolutionists following in Darwin’s footsteps didnot question his theory of evolution through centersof origin and dispersal. The science of biogeographywas reduced to the practice of creating historical

narratives or stories about imagined centers of originand dispersal routes for each individual group oforganisms. These stories were constructed accordingto prevailing beliefs about evolutionary age, dispersalability, geological and ecological history, and mostimportant, particular beliefs about how the center oforigin could be identified. A variety of contradictorycriteria were theorized to identify the center of origin,among the most popular being the location of theoldest fossil or the most primitive (and thereforeoldest) member of the evolutionary group. Biogeo-graphic narratives were always a product of prevailingbeliefs and knowledge never advanced beyond whatwas already presumed to be known from geologicalor ecological history. In this role, biogeography isrendered, at best, a subdiscipline of ecology or system-atics, and not a very informative one at that.

Darwin’s theory of geographic evolution faced itsfirst serious challenge from Leon Croizat, who wasperhaps the first biogeographer to formally recognizegeographic location as an independent source ofhistorical information about the evolution and originof species. Croizat’s unique approach was first devel-oped in the 1950s and became known as panbiogeog-raphy. His research program analyzed the geographicrelationships between different taxa at different local-ities using line graphs or “tracks.” Tracks are generallydrawn to connect localities over the shortest geo-graphic distance, since that provides the minimumamount of geographic space and therefore the mini-mum number of ad hoc geographic hypothesesrequired to explain the spatial relationships. The linegraphs allow direct comparison of spatial geometryfor groups of organisms and tectonic features (such asocean basins and geosynclines) associated with earthhistory. These biological and geological componentscomprise the raw data of biogeography. Darwin’spredication that dispersal ability would be the keyto understanding the evolution of geographic dis-tribution was not supported by this approach. WhenCroizat compared tracks, he found that supposedly“poor” dispersers could be as widely distributed as“good” dispersers. He also found that animal andplant distributions could be correlated with geomor-phologic features, and this suggested that geologicalhistory had more to do with the evolution of a distri-bution than with dispersal ability.

The overlap between tectonic features and multi-ple distribution patterns suggested to Croizat thatgeological and biological patterns share a common

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE BIO GEO GRAPHY 203

history. This shared history may be explained as theresult of an ancestor occupying a widespread geo-graphic range across the tectonic feature. Descendanttaxa now occur in different localities because eachevolved through local differentiation over differentparts of the ancestral range, giving the appearancethat each had moved to their respective locations. Thespatial pattern linking the descendant species is stillcorrelated with the tectonic feature involved with theancestral dispersal.

Croizat referred to his differentiation model as“vicariant form-making.” For each taxon (whether aspecies, genus, or family, and so on), the “center oforigin” is, in effect, the combined range of the relatedtaxa, rather than a localized part of the range as inDarwin’s theory. With the panbiogeographic method,historical inference is the product of spatial compar-isons between distributions, rather than prevailingbeliefs about the age of taxa or historical events theo-rized from other historical disciplines such as geologyor ecology. It is this spatial dimension of evolutionthat is missing from most historical accounts of pri-mate biogeography and evolution.

The biogeography of primates is usually inter-preted according to Darwin’s theory of centers of ori-gin, which are usually identified as the location of theoldest fossil. Migrations from the center of origin arethen imagined according to the geological age of var-ious fossil members, molecular clock theories, andtheories about the sequence of continental connec-tions or their absence. For primates as a whole, thecenter of origin is assigned to a location in the OldWorld, apparently because the primitive prosimiansare absent in the New World. The presence of mon-keys in South America is therefore explained by thetheory that their common ancestor either hoppedacross former islands in the Atlantic or rafted acrossthe sea. Prosimians, even though they represent anolder lineage, were somehow unable to make the trip.The possibility that monkeys made the trip fromAfrica while it was adjacent to South America is usu-ally discounted because it is assumed that the oldestmonkey fossil, dated at 35 million years, shows thatmonkeys did not evolve until after the Atlanticformed earlier in the Cretaceous. Conversely, despitethe geographic isolation of Madagascar in theCretaceous, this was somehow not a barrier toprosimians, while monkeys were evidently unable tomake the trip across the Mozambique Channel, eventhough Darwinian biogeographers frequently invoke

island hopping to account for the presence of myriadother animals and plants on the island. It is this con-tradictory theorizing that exemplifies biogeographicreasoning that appeals to imaginary centers of originand dispersal.

Anthropoid evolution is similarily portrayed, withthe imagined center of origin swinging back andforth between Africa and Asia according to the for-tunes of fossil discovery, sometimes with migrationsboth ways for monkeys, apes, and even hominids. Theresult is a biogeographic mess, with primates walkingor rafting this way and that and making global migra-tions by crossing continents, land bridges, or enduringdramatic transoceanic voyages. All of these storiesrequire an imaginary interpretation of fossils asmigratory markers and presumptions about the loca-tion of older fossils or primitive lineages being at ornear the imagined center of origin. Each time an olderfossil or more primitive lineage turns up or a newmolecular clock theory is produced, the current storywill be supplanted by another with the caveat thatsomehow there has been scientific progress that is dif-ferent from what was “previously thought.”

A panbiogeographic approach to primate evolutionrequires only a consideration of how the geographicdistribution of any one group compares with biogeo-graphic patterns in general and how these patterns arespatially correlated with geomorphological features.Fossils provide information on the minimal age offossilization localities currently not represented byextant forms. There is considerable debate over manyaspects of primate phylogeny, and there is a great dealof uncertainty about the relationships between earlyprimate fossils and living taxa. The evolution ofhominids and apes emerges out of the commonancestor with Old World monkeys and, in turn, thecommon ancestor to both Old World and New Worldmonkeys and primates in general. To provide this his-torical context, the spatial biogeography of apes beginswith general biogeographic patterns for primates over-all, with a focus on the extant primate groups.

The dispersal (in the sense of geographic differen-tiation) of extant primates involves three principalgroupings: prosimians, tarsiers, and anthropoids(monkeys and hominoids). Prosimians show a patterncentered on the Indian Ocean (as a tectonic basin),with lemurs confined to Madagascar and loriseslocated in Africa, southern India, and SoutheastAsia. Lorises include two families, the Galagonidaewidespread in Africa, but absent from outside that

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


continent, and the Loridae in central western Africa,with an eastern boundary at the Rift Valley, India, andSoutheast Asia. The spatial break between the westernRift Valley and Southeast Asia is a standard patternfound in other groups of plants and animals. Tarsiersare often seen as being phylogenetically enigmaticdue to their many unique features, but they exhibitthe unique toothcomb of prosimians and may there-fore be seen as an eastern component of the prosimiandistribution.

Prosimian biogeography is classic for its concen-tration in areas around the Indian Ocean, and in thisrespect, prosimian evolution is similar to many otherplants and animals largely or wholly limited to land-masses in the immediate vicinity of the Indian Oceanbasin while being largely absent from the Americasand the Pacific. The direct historical inference of thistectonic correlation is that prosimian ancestors werealready widely distributed before the formation of theIndian Ocean in the Late Cretaceous and EarlyTertiary time, even though the earliest recognizedfossils with prosimian affinities (the omomyids) areonly about 40 million years old. The biogeographiccorrelation suggests that the ancestors of lorises andlemurs each emphasized different geographic areas,so that their descendant now vicariate (occupy differ-ent areas) with respect to each other. Even the overlapbetween lorises and tarsiers indicates slightly differentancestral distributions for each group, with moderntarsiers being present in the Celebes and some

Philippine islands wherelorises are absent. This cur-rent biogeographic patternfor prosimians does notpreclude fossil forms ofeach group occurring inother parts of the prosimianrange (lemurs in Africa, forexample), but such locali-ties are seen as outside themain centers of evolutionfor each group as repre-sented by their moderndiversity.

Unlike prosimians,anthropoids (monkeys,apes, humans) are foundin both the Old and NewWorlds, with platyrrhinemonkeys in the Americas

and catarrhine monkeys and apes in the Old World.This trans-Atlantic range is also standard for plantsand animals in general and may predict the origin ofanthropoids in the Late Cretaceous even though theiroldest fossil representatives are currently known noearlier than about 35 million years. The anthropoidsshare with prosimians a distribution range that is cur-rently largely to the south of a major tectonic feature,the Tethyan geosyncline, which extends betweenEurope and Southeast Asia, with a Caribbean exten-sion prior to the formation of the Atlantic. Thegeosyncline formed through the closure of theTethys Sea in from Late Cretaceous and Early Tertiarytime. Although living and fossil prosimians andanthropoids do occur north of Tethys, the pre-dominant diversity to the south may reflect thegeographic distribution of ancestral diversity thatlay more to the south of Tethys than to the north.A contrasting pattern is represented by the Plesi-adapiformes, a fossil group first appearing about65 million years ago. These fossils may represent earlyprimates or primate relatives of uncertain mono-phyly. As currently recognized, the Plesiadapiformesare distributed to the north of Tethys, over partsof eastern Asia and North America. They are, there-fore, largely vicariant (spatially separate) with respectto prosimians and anthropoids. This separation mayrepresent a more inclusive widespread commonancestor that ranged both north and south of Tethysin Mesozoic time.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE BIO GEO GRAPHY 205

Apes represent a sister group to the Old Worldmonkeys, and as such they share the same evolution-ary age, though they exhibit some highly derivedfeatures that separate them from all other primates.The earliest fossil for apes is represented by Proconsulat 18 million years, though the lineage must extendto at least the time of the earliest fossil representativesof catarrhine primates at 35 million years. Livingapes comprise the small-bodied hominoids, orHylobatidae, in Southeast Asia representing the sistergroup of the large-bodied hominoids in Africa (Pan,Gorilla) and Southeast Asia (Pongo). The fossil recordfor the Hylobatidae may be represented by a lateMiocene fossil in China. Neither Pan nor Gorillahave a recognized fossil record, although therehave been suggestions that the putative hominidSahelanthropus may actually be more closely relatedto gorillas. Only Pongo is represented by fossils aswell as having recognized fossil relatives, such asSivapithecus, extending the fossil record for this groupat least 14 million years.

The biogeography of living and fossil great apesis problematic because of an unresolved conflictbetween alternative phylogenetic models developedfrom different lines of evidence. The almost univer-sally accepted model links chimpanzees as the sistergroup of humans because they share the greatest sim-ilarity of DNA base sequence. This pattern of rela-tionship is contradicted by the virtual absence of anyuniquely shared morphological similarities betweenthe two groups and by morphological evidence over-whelmingly supporting the orangutans as the closestliving relative of humans. Most primate biologistsconsider the DNA sequence evidence to invalidate themorphological evidence, so the orangutan relation-ship is generally ignored. What cannot be ignored,however, is the fossil history of primates, whichbecomes insolvable and unscientific if morphologycannot provide an independently relative source ofphylogenetic evidence because fossils lie beyond thereach of DNA analysis. Without morphology, the evo-lutionary relationships of living hominoids cannot beintegrated with their fossil relatives, let alone knowwhat fossils are hominoids (or even primates) in thefirst place.

As an independent source of evidence for evolu-tionary relationships among primates, the charactersuniquely shared between orangutans and humans mayhave a dramatic impact on the interpretation of thefossil ape fauna. Of the 40 features uniquely shared

between humans and orangutans, only 14 hard-tissuecharacters are applicable to fossils, and even less arewidely comparable due to incomplete skeletal com-position of most fossil apes. Only dental remains arebroadly represented, and they also comprise a sourceof uniquely shared human orangutan characters inthe form of thick dental enamel and low molar cusps.When these features are considered for fossil apes, it ispossible to separate out a distinct clade allied withhumans and orangutans that encompass a range offossil apes previously seen as mostly peripheral to theevolution of modern apes and humans.

The presence of thick dental enamel and low molarcusps is found in a range of fossil apes that are eithergenerally allied with orangutans or of uncertain sta-tus (see Figure 1). The fossil record of orangutansextends into the Pleistocene of Southeast Asia andsouthern China. Within this geographic range arealso the closely related genera Langsonia in northernVietnam (250–300,000 years), Khoratpithecus inThailand (7–9 million years), and Lufengpithecus insouthern China (9–8 million years). The distributionsof these genera are complemented by the mostlyvicariant range of Gigantopithecus in India andChina (2–0.5 million years) and the related genusSivapithecus (Ramapithecus) in India (14–10 millionyears). Other fossil apes with thick dental enamel andlow molar cusps include Ankarapithecus in Turkey(11–10 million years), Ouranopithecus in Greece(9 million years), and Hispanopithecus in Spain(10–9 million years). The biogeographic track forthese taxa shows a pattern closely conforming to theTethyan geosyncline (see Figure 1). This correlationsuggests an ancestral range along the coastlines ofthe former Tethys between Europe and Asia that wasdisrupted during the closure of Tethys by tectonicuplift and subduction. This geological process mayhave promoted local differentiation of each genusover the ancestral range, so that the “center of origin”of this great ape clade extends across both Europe andAsia, rather then being restricted to any one part ofthe range.

The Tethyan range of the orangutan clade may alsoapply to the origin of hominids in Africa. Recognizedfossil hominid genera such as Australopithecus alsoexhibit features otherwise unique to orangutans andtheir fossil relatives, including broad cheekbones withforward facing anterior roots. These orangutan affini-ties are congruent with morphological evidence, withover 40 known synapomorphies supporting a sister

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


group relationship between humans and orangutans.Fossil australopithecine records extend back onlyabout 4.5 million years, whereas the orangutan lin-eage extends back at least 14 million years, as repre-sented by its fossil relative Sivapithecus. Other fossillinks may be represented by the proposed 6-million-year African hominid Orrorin, but the orangutanrelationship for humans would appear to rule out thefossil genera Ardipithecus and Sahelanthropus beinghominids at all.

Even with this very brief biogeographic overview,the evolutionary origins of humans may be seen asthe western counterpart to the orangutan in the east,with the intervening geographic space occupied by

now extinct members of the human-orangutan cladeacross the Tethyan geosyncline and its extensionalong the Rift Valley in Africa. The biogeographicand evolutionary resolution of the large-bodiedhominoids extends the fossil history for the humanlineage at least into the mid-Miocene, as indicatedby the minimal age of fossilization for Sivapithecus.Conversely, the question of what became of large-bodied Miocene apes in Africa may now also beanswered by the orangutan affinities of the australop-iths. Isolated fossil teeth identified in the literatureas Australopithecus conforming to the dental charac-teristics of orangutans suggest that the MioceneAfrican apes did survive to become what are now

%% %%

#

#

Figure 1 Biogeography of ancestral hominids (excluding Homo), orangutans, and their fossil relatives. Generalized localities and

taxa distributed as follows: Australopithecus–black polygon (Africa), Orrorin–yellow circle (Kenya), Hispanopithecus–brown square

(Spain), Ouranopithecus–crimson square (Greece), Ankarapithecus–blue square (Turkey), Sivapithecus–yellow square (India),

Gigantopithecus–blue polygon (China, India), Pongo-red polygon (China-Southeast Asia), Khoratpithecus–black circle (Thailand), and

Langsonia-red circle (Vietnam). The Chad locality for Australopithecus is not included due to lack of independent verification of the

fossil as a member of the genus. Vertical lines-generalized geological range of the Tethyan geosyncline representing former Tertiary coast-

lines now largely obliterated, of which the Mediterranean Sea remains the largest surviving remnant

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE CO GNITION 207

recognized as Plio-Pleistocene hominids. They arebipedal orangutan relatives by another place andanother name.

— John R. Grehan

See also Apes, Greater; Croizat, Leon; Hominid Taxo-nomy; Hominization, Issues in; Primate Morphology andEvolution; Primatology

Further Readings

Cochion, R. L., & Fleagle, J. G. (1987). Primateevolution and human origins. New York:Aldine de Gruyter.

Craw, R. C., Grehan, J. R., & Heads, M. J. (1999).Panbiogeography: Tracking the history of life.New York: Oxford University Press.

Croizat, L. (1958). Panbiogeography. Caracas,Venezuela: Author.

Croizat, L. (1964). Space, time, form: The biologicalsynthesis. Caracas, Venezuelas: Author.

Jones, S., Martin, R., & Pilbeam, D. (1992). TheCambridge encyclopedia of human evolution.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schwartz, J. H. (2004). The red ape: Orangutansand human origins. Boulder, CO: WestviewPress.

Schwartz J. H., & Tattersall, I. (2005). The human fossilrecord: Vol. 3. Craniodental morphology of earlyhominids. New York: Wiley-Liss.

4 APE COGNITION

Biological anthropologists use the comparativeperspective in their efforts to reconstruct humanevolutionary history. As our closest living relatives,primates are often used to frame comparisons and totest hypotheses about various human features. A fea-ture (behavioral, genetic, or anatomical) that appearsin all primate species is at least initially assumed toalso characterize the last common ancestor of thosespecies; features present in only one form presum-ably evolved at some point after it diverged, andhypotheses explaining the features are developed inthe context of unique aspects of the organism’s ecol-ogy and anatomy. The large-bodied apes (orang-utans, gorillas, chimpanzees, and bonobos) are most

closely related to humans, so those species, particularlychimpanzees, are the preferred ones to compare tofossil and living humans. However, comparisonsbetween humans and other more distantly relatedspecies are also informative and serve to demonstrateinstances of evolutionary convergences (similarselective pressures lead to similar outcomes in dis-tantly related forms) or features that evolved beforethe ape/human split as our primate or mammalianheritage.

Students of Darwin assume continuity betweenspecies, and they use a comparative approach tounderstand biology, behavior, and cognition of pri-mates. These evolutionary anthropologists predictthat few traits, including cognitive ones, will arisede novo—evolutionary precursors are the norm. Incontrast, cultural anthropologists have sometimesfocused on the uniqueness of the human mind, par-ticularly with respect to language and culture, andassume gaps in the phylogenetic scale.

The dictionary defines cognition as “the act orprocess of knowing, including both awareness andjudgment; also a product of this act.” These con-structs are impossible to observe in humans andnonhumans; thus researchers are left with studyingbehaviors and defining those behaviors as indicatorsof a particular cognitive function. The methods ofobservation and the definitions of behaviors shouldbe used consistently across species to increase thevalidity of comparisons.

Primatologists are scientists who study the behav-ior, biology, and evolution of nonhuman primates.The field of primatology draws from individualstrained as psychologists, biologists, or anthropolo-gists, and one’s training has a profound impact onresearch questions asked. Traditionally, primatolo-gists trained as anthropologists studied wild nonhu-man primates and used resulting data to modelhominids and to better understand modern humans.Primatologists trained as psychologists focused moreheavily on cognitive processes, intelligence, and lan-guage and usually explored these topics using captivenonhuman primates where experimental conditionsare more easily controlled.

Here we trace the quest to understand, howeverimperfectly, the ape mind. The study of ape cognitiveabilities includes research conducted with captiveindividuals, where more precise control over experi-mental and rearing conditions are possible, andindividuals living in the wild, where relationships

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE CO GNITION208

between particular cognitive abilities and aspects ofthe organism’s environment can more readily beexplored.

History of Primate Cognition

Studies of nonhuman primate cognition began in theWestern intellectual tradition in the early 20th cen-tury and were conducted by psychologists. NadieKohts studied the perceptual and conceptual skills ofa young chimpanzee, Joni, from 1913 to 1916, andcompared them to those of her son, Roody. She pub-lished her observations in 1935 in Russian in the bookInfant Chimpanzee and Human Child, which hasrecently been translated into English (2002). She useda comparative developmental approach and estab-lished a tradition of rearing the research subject in ahome setting, which was to be revisited later in thecentury by other scientists. Wolfgang Kohler, aGerman psychologist, presented a variety of problemsto captive chimpanzees. The chimpanzees had accessto materials that, when assembled, could be used toobtain a reward, such as bananas. Kohler describedhis findings in his 1925 book The Mentality of Apes.The roots of American primatology can be traced toKohler’s contemporary, Robert M. Yerkes, a psycholo-gist fascinated with the evolution of intelligence.Yerkes explored this subject in captive apes and estab-lished what eventually became known as YerkesRegional Primate Center in Atlanta, Georgia. AfterYerkes’s pioneering research, primate cognition con-tinued to be studied in laboratory settings by scien-tists such as William Mason, Emil Menzel Jr., DuaneRumbaugh, David Premack, and Allen and BeatrixGardner, among others. The realization that cogni-tion could also be examined in wild populationscame slowly, in part as a consequence of the long-term ape research of Dian Fossey, Biruté Galdikas,and Jane Goodall. While their projects were notintended to focus on primate cognition, their workdemonstrated apes’ complex mental abilities, includ-ing long memory, tool manufacture and use, and theuse of social stratagems. Sophisticated social and cog-nitive skills were also emerging from data collectedfrom wild baboons by Barbara Smuts, JeanneAltmann, Shirley Strum, and Joan Silk and from wildvervets by Dorothy Cheney and Robert Seyfarth. Theshift to the study of cognition in wild populationsoffers exciting opportunities to explore relationshipsbetween particular cognitive abilities and aspects of

the organism’s environment—that is, to understandthe evolutionary significance of a particular mentalcapacity.

Cross-Fostering

Ethologists use the procedure called “cross-foster-ing” to study the interaction between environmentaland genetic factors by having parents of one speciesrear the young of a different species. Primate cross-fostering projects date to the 1930s, when Winthropand Luella Kellog raised the infant chimpanzee Guafor a period of 9 months with their son. In the 1950s,Keith and Cathy Hayes cross-fostered the chimpanzeeViki while attempting to teach her to talk. After fouryears she was able to say four words, mama, papa, cup,and up. This research demonstrated that chimpanzeescannot speak, leading to the search for other means oftesting language and other cognitive abilities of apes.

Allen and Beatrix Gardner cross-fostered theinfant chimpanzee Washoe and immersed her inAmerican Sign Language (ASL). In teaching ASLto Washoe, caregivers imitated human parents teach-ing human children in human homes. For example,they called attention to objects, expanded on frag-mentary utterances, and molded Washoe’s handsinto the shape of new signs. In a second project, theGardners cross-fostered four more chimpanzees,Moja, Pili, Tatu, and Dar. All of these cross-fosterlingsacquired and used signs in ways that paralleledhuman children. The size of their vocabularies,appropriate use of sentence constituents, number ofutterances, proportion of phrases, and inflection allgrew robustly throughout the 5-year cross-fosteringprocess.

In 1979, at the University of Oklahoma under thecare of Roger and Deborah Fouts, Washoe adopted a10-month-old chimpanzee son, Loulis. Human sign-ing was restricted in Loulis’s presence to test whetherhe could learn ASL from other chimpanzees ratherthan from humans. Loulis began to sign in 1 week,and at 73 months of age had a vocabulary of 51 signs.Washoe, Loulis, Tatu, and Dar now live together atthe Chimpanzee and Human Communication Insti-tute (CHCI) at Central Washington University inEllensburg, Washington. Current research shows thatthey sign to each other and to themselves. The chim-panzees initiate conversations and maintain topics.When human interlocutors feign a misunderstand-ing, the chimpanzees adjust their responses appropri-ately. The chimpanzees’ patterns of conversation with

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE CO GNITION 209

human caregivers resemble patterns of conversationfound in similar studies of human children.

Language Training

In 1979, Herb Terrace claimed to have replicatedAllen and Beatrix Gardners’s cross-fostering projectwith a chimpanzee named Nim. The young chim-panzee spent 6 hours each day in a classroom whilea string of teachers drilled him with questions anddemands for signing. If he wanted something, theteachers withheld it until he signed for it. Terracefound that Nim made few spontaneous utterancesand often interrupted his teachers. This procedurediffered greatly from the Gardners’s cross-fosteringproject, in which the young chimpanzees were treatedlike children. Terrace’s failure to create a comparableenvironment for language acquisition led to Nim’sfailures. Later studies showed that Nim made morespontaneous utterances and interrupted less in a con-versational context.

In 1972, Francine Patterson began teaching signsto an infant gorilla, Koko, and later Michael. Thegorillas acquired many signs and used them in allof their interactions with their caregivers. At theUniversity of Tennessee at Chattanooga, Lyn Milestaught signs to a young orangutan, Chantek, in 1978.He produced signs spontaneously and combinedthem into phrases. In 1986, Chantek was returned toYerkes Regional Primate Center where he was born,and the project continued on a modified basis.

Also in the 1970s, David Premack used plastictokens and Duane Rumbaugh used Yerkish, both arti-ficial systems to examine grammatical skills in chim-panzees. Later Sue Savage-Rumbaugh attempted totrain a bonobo, Matata, to use lexigrams, the symbolsof Yerkish. While Matata failed to use the lexigrams,her infant son, Kanzi, who was present during train-ing, did use them. Devoid of face-to-face interaction,these studies reveal little about conversational behav-ior, but they do demonstrate apes’ capacities tounderstand language and to respond appropriately torequests.

Knowledge of the Physical World

From studies of how primates interact with theirphysical world, scientists make inferences aboutprimates’ understandings of (1) object permanence,(2) cause and effect relationships, (3) spatial knowl-edge, and (4) quantitative abilities, among many

other topics. These skills likely evolved as part of asuite of foraging behaviors that, among other func-tions, facilitate tracking, finding, and extracting food.

Object Permanence

Object permanence refers to how an individualresponds to an object that an experimenter hides. Inthe 1950s, Jean Piaget devised a series of tests to showthe development of object permanence in stages. Inone test, the experimenter places an object under acover while the child watches. If the child lifts the cover,he or she has achieved Stage 4 of object permanence.Later stages are tested by multiple and invisible dis-placements. Piaget claimed that Stage 6 required men-tal representation and is achieved by 18–24 months inhumans. Chimpanzees and gorillas have been testedand demonstrated Stage 6 object permanence.

Cause and Effect

Ape tool manufacture and use gives us insight intoapes’ understandings of cause-and-effect relationsbecause the tool is constructed or modified to achievea particular goal. Gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos, andorangutans use tools in captivity, but only the latterthree have been observed using tools in the wild (pre-sumably the gorilla’s leafy diet and great strength ren-ders tools useless in its natural environment). Forexample, orangutans use sticks to extract honey frombee nests and leaves as gloves to protect their handsfrom thorny branches. Chimpanzees put leaves on theground as seats or crumple leaves to sponge water.They use large sticks as clubs and pestles. Furthermore,they use specific tools for specific tasks. For example,in the Tai Forest (Ivory Coast), they use stones to crackhard Panda nuts and wood to crack soft Coula nuts.Some stone anvils have depressions from years ofrepeated use. Chimpanzees use tool sets to obtain ter-mites from a mound; the different tools are used in aparticular sequence to first perforate the mound andthen extract the termites. Apes that have had opportu-nities to observe humans use a tool will use the sametool in the same way. For example, an ex-pet orangutanliving at Camp Leakey (Tanjung Puting, Borneo) builta fire with a flint and gasoline, following the tools andtechniques used by humans at the camp.

Spatial Knowledge

Tests of spatial knowledge include analyses of howindividuals navigate through, or “cognitively map,”

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE CO GNITION210

the environment. In the 1970s, Emil Menzel Jr. hidfood in various locations in a 1-acre enclosure while achimpanzee watched. When released into the enclo-sure, the chimpanzee foraged for the food in the mostefficient pattern using a least distance strategy whilemoving from one item to the next. Researchers study-ing wild apes, including gibbons, have found thatindividuals move efficiently through the forest ratherthan in random patterns.

Quantitative Abilities

Apes’ quantitative skills have been indexed in avariety of ways. They are able to distinguish groupingsof more or fewer objects in a set. Some chimpanzeeshave learned to use Arabic numerals to representnumbers of objects in sets (“3” for three jelly beans)and to count the number of objects in a set. Somechimpanzees have learned to add the numbers in twosets to reach a sum (three jelly beans plus four jellybeans totals seven).

Artwork

Captive apes produce drawings and paintingsusing drawing implements, paints, and brushes. Thesigning chimpanzees at CHCI provide names fortheir artistic pieces, and their drawings or representa-tions of a particular object are consistent in appear-ance from one illustration to the next. For example,pictures labeled as “bird” always have a V shape inthem. When asked to draw a berry, chimpanzee Mojausually drew a small round object.

Social Intelligence

Intense sociality is one of the most distinctive charac-teristics of primates. Species living in large, complexgroups might be expected to exhibit behaviors thatenhance individuals’ abilities to operate effectively ina variety of social arenas with considerable insightinto the likely actions of group mates. A long periodof dependence on parents’ care and long lives con-tribute to this sociality, as individuals have lifelongrelationships that may last 50 years or more. Socialintelligence is the study of behaviors that occur in therealm of social interactions.

Learning

While controversial, it is apparent that primateslearn by watching and imitating the behaviors of

others in the social group. Young chimpanzees livingin the wild spend years observing other chimpanzeescracking nuts with stones or dipping sticks into termitemounds. These foraging skills take years to master,and a chimpanzee may not be fully proficient at themuntil she or he is 8 years old or older. Field researchershave observed mothers actively teaching their offspringnutcracking skills by careful and slow demonstration.The cross-fostered chimpanzee Washoe modeled signsfor her son Loulis, signed on his body, and demon-strated some signs to him, although he learned mostof his signs by watching and imitating Washoe andothers signing chimpanzees.

Coalitions

Primates form coalitions in which two individualscooperate and support each other to compete with athird individual. Typically, support goes to a moredominant individual. In these cases, the dominantindividual’s high status is reinforced, while the lower-ranking supporter may gain status or improved accessto resources. Primates also engage in more risky, tacti-cal coalitions in which both coalition partners willbenefit from their relationship if their coalition isstrong enough to overturn (immediately or eventually)the dominant individual. If not, they both stand tolose. Among wild chimpanzees, grooming behaviorsare sometimes directed strategically at an individual toobtain or maintain his support in future dominancecontests. A dominant chimpanzee, Ntologi, consis-tently separated two less dominant males when theywere together or grooming, apparently because theircoalition threatened his status. In his study of captivechimpanzees, Frans de Waal described a dominantmale’s repeated attempts to break up coalitionsbetween two males ranked below him. Eventually, oneof these lower-ranked males displaced the dominantthrough the assistance of his coalition partner, whoserank was also elevated by the displacement.

In chimpanzee communities, high dominance isnot always predicted by mere physical power, butinstead is associated with social prowess and the abil-ity to form and maintain coalitions. One chimpanzeeat Gombe (Tanzania) famously obtained top rankthrough his intimidation displays using noisy, emptygas cans pilfered from Jane Goodall’s camp. Theseexamples indicate that strategic skills are importantin determining one’s status.

Chimpanzees of the Tai Forest (Ivory Coast) engagein hunting where individuals take cooperative and

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE CO GNITION 211

complementary roles. For example, some individualsblock the prey’s escape route while others chase theprey. Again, such data reflect tactical and strategicskills of chimpanzees because they require an under-standing of others’ actions and the likely outcome ofthose actions.

Deception

Tactical deception is defined as “acts from the nor-mal repertoire of the agent, deployed such that anotherindividual is likely to misinterpret what the acts signify,to the advantage of the agent.” Byrne and Whiten sur-veyed primatologists working with captive and wildpopulations. They obtained 132 descriptions of pri-mate deception that they then categorized into threetypes. Examples of active concealment include a gorillacovering a playface and a chimpanzee covering anerection. Active misleading occurs when an individualprovides misinformation. For example, as part of usualexperimental procedures designed to test spatialknowledge, chimpanzee Belle alone saw the location offood hidden in the enclosure. Rock, a more dominantchimpanzee, often took the food from her when theylater were released together in the foraging trial. Onseveral occasions, Belle led her group mates to thewrong location and ran back to enjoy the true foodsource on her own. On other trials, the experimentershid a single piece of food away from the main cache.Belle then led Rock to the single piece of food; thenshe alone rushed back to the main cache. In coun-terdeception, the deceiver is deceived by another. In anexample of this, after Belle’s misleading, Rock some-times walked away from her and then suddenly spunaround to watch her.

Theory of Mind

Theory of mind is defined as one individual havingthe ability to take the perspective of another. Tests oftheory of mind in human children entail creating situ-ations that show what children know about others’beliefs, knowledge, and attention. For example, in oneexperiment a child sat in a room with two adults. Oneadult placed an object in one of three containers andthen left the room. The second adult and the childmoved the object to another container. The adultasked the child,“When the absent adult returns will helook for the object in its original location, or the newlocation?” Autistic and very young children answeredthat he will look in the new location; older childrenresponded that he will look in the original location.

Apes in captivity and in the wild demonstrate skillsthat fall under the heading of theory of mind. Apes,for example, gesture to others if the receiver is able tosee the sender, but if the receiver is oriented so thathis or her view is blocked, the sender instead usesauditory or tactile signals. In a test similar to the onegiven to children described above, an orangutan indi-cated an object’s new location to an experimenterwho did not know that the object had been movedduring his absence. In another test, captive chim-panzees watched a human put food into a container.In the test phase, the chimpanzees could ask one oftwo humans to help: the human who hid the food oranother human who did not know the food’s loca-tion. Most chimpanzees chose the knowledgeablehuman.

Valid Comparisons

Many of these highly inferential studies of socialintelligence have found that apes reared in cages per-form poorly on tests when compared to home-rearedhuman children or human-reared apes. When theapes demonstrate success, it is often attributed to“enculturation,” or the human-rearing conditions, asif this endows the ape with new abilities rather thanenabling the normal expression of capacities that arealready present. Cage-reared chimpanzees have delaysin motor development when compared to their wildcounterparts. Likewise, human children reared inorphanages often show delays in motor development,especially when there is a high infant-to-caregiverratio, as compared to home-reared children. Cogni-tive research comparing cage-reared apes to humanchildren raised in stimulating environments probablytells us more about the effect of environment on cog-nitive development than about the cognitive capacitiesof the two species. We urge caution when interpretingresults that claim that a cognitive ability is exclusivelyhuman when the comparison subjects include apesreared in restricted, unenriched environments.

Mirror Studies

Mirror studies were developed in the 1970s byGordon G. Gallup Jr. as an experimental means ofassessing an organism’s sense of self. When presentedwith a mirror, many organisms either have no reac-tion to it or respond to what they see reflected in asocial manner. A dog, for example, might ignore orbark at its mirror image. Large-bodied apes use theirmirror images for self-inspection, as do human adults

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE CO GNITION212

and older children. Experimenters use the dye test toexamine responses to mirror images. In this test, theexperimenter secretly marks the subject. When thesubject sees his or her mirror image, the experimentalquestion is whether the subject touches or inspectsthe mark. If the subject touches it, he or she hasdemonstrated the use of the mirror for self-inspection.Researchers argue that apes and human children thatinspect the mark have a sense of self.

Imaginary Play

Human children engage in imaginary play in avariety of ways. They use objects as though they aresomething else, treat inanimate objects as if alive,play roles, and create pretend scenarios. Apes alsoengage in pretend play. The cross-fostered chim-panzee Viki had an imaginary pull toy, and cross-fostered CHCI chimpanzee Dar played tickle gameswith a stuffed animal. Wild chimpanzees also engagein pretend play, such as carrying logs as if theywere young chimpanzees. The gorilla Koko and thebonobo Kanzi have gone through the motions ofeating imaginary objects. Similarly, wild chimpanzeeWanda dipped an imaginary stick into an imaginarytermite mound.

Culture

Culture is a central concept of anthropology, andmany scholars have devoted their careers to attempt-ing to capture the tangible and intangible aspects ofit. Culture is sometimes viewed by anthropologists asbeing exclusively human—“something humans do.”Biologists, however, have developed their own defini-tions of culture that expand its possible existence tononhuman and nonprimate forms. Fish biologistsLaland and Hoppitt define cultures as “those group-typical behavior patterns shared by members of acommunity that rely on socially learned and trans-mitted information.” More important than defini-tions, which exclude or include particular species, aredescriptions of the behaviors.

Chimpanzees, orangutans, and humans use a vari-ety of tools to extract foods, and the types of toolsthey use vary from one region to another. These tool-using traditions are socially transmitted. Monkeys,apes, and humans communicate visually and use var-ious gestures, postures, and facial expression in theirinteractions with each other. Chimpanzees, bonobos,and orangutans in different regions use different

gestures. For example, chimpanzees at Gombe StreamReserve in Tanzania grasp an overhead branch duringgrooming, while just south in the Mahale Mountainsthe chimpanzees grasp each other’s hands duringgrooming. Researchers working at nine differentlong-term chimpanzee field sites collaborated anddeveloped a list of 65 behavior patterns. The behav-iors were classified in terms of their local frequencyof occurrence. There were 39 behaviors that theresearchers determined were cultural variants, sincethey were absent in some communities and custom-ary or habitual in others. The behaviors involvedtool use and grooming and courtship behaviors. Thissame analysis has been applied to orangutans andbonobos, and cultural variants have been identifiedin both of these species. For example, orangutans inone location place a kiss squeak on a leaf, while inanother location they place a kiss squeak on the backof the hand.

— Mary Lee Jensvold and Lori K. Sheeran

Further Readings

Bekoff, Marc, Allen, Colin, & Burghardt, Gordon M.(2002). The cognitive animal. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.

Boesch, Christophe, & Boesch-Achermann, Hedwige.(2000). The chimpanzees of the Tai Forest.New York: Oxford University Press.

Byrne, Richard. (1995). The thinking ape. Oxford, UK:Oxford University Press.

Fouts, Roger, & Mills, Stephen. (1997). Next of kin.New York: William Morrow.

Gardner, R. Allen, Gardner, Beatrix T., & VanCantfort, Thomas E. (Eds.). (1986). Teaching signlanguage to chimpanzees. Albany: State Universityof New York Press.

Goodall, Jane. (1986). The chimpanzees of Gombe.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

McGrew, William. (2004). The cultured chimpanzees.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Robbins, Martha M., Sicotte, Pascale, & Stewart, Kelly J.(Eds.). (2001). Mountain gorillas. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.

Russon, Anne E., & Begun, David R. (Eds.). (2004).The evolution of thought. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.

Tomasello, Michael, & Call, Josep. (1997). Primatecognition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Van Schaik, Carel. (2004). Among orangutans.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE L ANGUAGE 213

4 APE LANGUAGE

Language is a collection of symbols that representsobjects, actions, and thoughts. It is representational,allowing for the transmission and relocation of infor-mation between minds. It can be written, spoken, ges-tured, and/or signed for purposes of communication.

It is often debated whether or not humans are theonly animal possessing language capabilities. In par-ticular, some studies have revealed that great apes(chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans)exhibit some languagelike qualities. Apes have a largerbrain size to body size ratio than all other nonhumanprimates. In addition, one of the apes, the chim-panzee (Pan troglodytes), shares 98.4% of theirdeoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) with humans.

Apes typically use scent markings, pilo (hair) erec-tion, facial expressions, and vocalizations, as well asother verbal and visual means of communication.Apes also can communicate with humans, and chim-panzees are capable of forming infrequent humanvocalizations in response to human speech. In addi-tion, some apes make the complex hand movementsused in American Sign Language (ASL).

Nonetheless, ape language is qualitatively differentthan human language. Apes do not have a vocal tractthat allows them to speak the same way people do.Also, apes do not have the same level of intelligence ashumans, which some believe is necessary for under-standing and producing speech. Furthermore, apelanguage is not as complex or expressive as humanlanguage.

There have been many studies on the language abil-ities of the great apes. Research has been conducted onthe evolution of language, the acquisition and produc-tion of language, as well as strategies for teaching lan-guage to humans. The results of some ape languagestudies have been beneficial to those working on lan-guage acquisition in mentally challenged children.

Manual signing, plastic “words,” computer lexi-grams, and simultaneous communication have beenused in ape language studies. In fact, human curiositywith the language abilities of apes dates back to the1930s. In 1933, Winthrop and Luella Kellogg raisedGua, a female chimpanzee, along with their infantson, Donald. Over a period of 9 months, Gua was ableto understand and respond to about 70 verbal com-mands. In 1966, another chimpanzee, Sarah, partici-pated in language research designed by David

Premack. Sarah learned to form sentences by placingplastic tokens that symbolized words in a vertical line.Sarah was able to read and write with over 130 words.

In 1967, two psychologists, Beatrice and AllenGardner, taught Washoe, an infant female chimpanzee,how to use ASL in the same way that parents teach deafchildren to sign. After a period of about 3 years, Washoelearned to sign approximately 130 words. Lana, anotherfemale chimpanzee, participated in a language studybeginning in 1971 at the Regional Centre of PrimateStudies at Yerkes. Duane Rumbaugh and colleaguesplaced Lana in an experimental chamber, where sheused a computer lexigram language system to “talk.”

Beginning in 1972, Koko, a female gorilla (Gorillagorilla), learned ASL through simultaneous commu-nication with Penny Patterson. Koko responded toverbal questions and signed novel combinations ofwords. Researchers noted that at times, Koko eventalked (signed) to herself and her dolls.

Nim Chimpsky, a chimpanzee, was raised and taughtsign language as if he were human. In 1979, HerbertTerrace developed a language study at ColumbiaUniversity in which Nim was a subject. In 44 months oftraining, Nim learned 125 words and was able to com-bine two- and three-word utterances. However, afterreviewing years of data, Terrace concluded that most ofthe time Nim was not signing spontaneously. Rather, heappeared to be imitating his trainer’s signs.

Chantek, an orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus), wastaught ASL by Lyn Miles, who raised him as her child.As Chantek’s vocabulary increased, the ideas that heexpressed became more intricate. Chantek used signsin combinations and even invented his own signs(for example, “eye-drink” for contact lens solution).Chantek learned over 150 words from 1979 to 1986and did not simply imitate his caregivers, but usedsigns to initiate communication. In addition, Chantekwas able to comprehend spoken English.

Kanzi, a bonobo (Pan paniscus), learned to use lan-guage without specifically being trained or promptedto do so. Kanzi accompanied his mother, Matata,when she attended language-learning sessions in 1980with Sue Savage-Rumbaugh. At the time, Matata wasbeing taught a computer lexigram language. DuringMatata’s language training, Kanzi often tried to inter-act with the researchers and sometimes touched thelexigrams on the keyboard. At first, Kanzi receivedlittle attention because his mother was the focus of thestudy. However, one day, Matata was absent and Kanziused the lexigrams competently, to the amazement

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE L ANGUAGE214

of the researchers. To date, Kanzi has learned approx-imately 256 lexigram words and can understand500 spoken English words.

In 1985, Kanzi’s sister, Panbanisha, joined the lan-guage studies at the Language Research Center inGeorgia. Panbanisha, a bonobo or “pygmy” chim-panzee, was co-reared with Panzee, a “common” chim-panzee, to see if there were any differences in languageacquisition and production between the two speciesof chimps. Like Kanzi, Panbanisha and Panzee becamelinguistically competent without specific training.However, it was found that there were differences in thelearning abilities of the two apes. Panbanisha learnedsymbols sooner and combined words in more novelways than Panzee. Currently, Panbanisha understandsover 3,000 words and uses a vocabulary of 250 words.

Although much has been learned from ape languagestudies regarding the ontogeny of language, there still isa substantial amount of controversy regarding howmuch apes’ language abilities resemble that of humans.Some research shows that apes do not use languagespontaneously (for example, Nim), while other researchdemonstrates that they do (Chantek). Another point ofcontention is whether or not apes can form grammati-cally ordered sentences. Although apes do constructsentences using multiple signs, the sentences are oftenrandom and/or repetitious. Notwithstanding, Kanzidoes not repeat himself often and appears to under-stand the grammatical rules about lexigram order.

After Terrace’s conclusions that Nim Chimpskyseemed to be mimicking the signs of his trainers andcould not grasp syntax, funding for ape languageresearch dwindled. Terrace’s findings were a major dis-appointment to talking-ape enthusiasts. However, thework of Sue Savage-Rumbaugh and colleagues bringsan encouraging perspective to those who believe thatgreat apes can acquire and produce language.

— Lisa M. Paciulli and Jacqueline L. Hagen

See also Apes, Greater; Koko (lowland gorilla); Language;Washoe

Further Readings

Fouts, R., & Mills, S. T. (1998). Next of kin: Myconversations with chimpanzees. New York:Perennial Currents.

Greenspan, S. I., & Shanker, S. G. (2004). The firstidea: How symbols, language, and intelligence

evolved from our primate ancestors to modernhumans. New York: Da Capo Press.

King, B. (1999). The origins of language. Santa Fe,NM: School of American Research Press.

Patterson, F., & Cohn, R. H. (1988). Koko’s story.New York: Scholastic.

Premack, D. (1976). Intelligence in ape and man.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Savage-Rumbaugh, S., Shanker, S. G., & Taylor, T. J.(2001). Apes, language, and the human mind.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Terrace, H. S. (1987). Nim, a chimpanzee who learnedsign language. New York: Columbia UniversityPress.

APE COMMUNIC ATION

Anthropologists and linguists have long debatedthe communication abilities of nonhuman primates.Linguists Noam Chomsky and Steven Pinker arguethat it is impossible to teach primates how to “talk,”while other researchers point to language skillsdemonstrated by a number of apes observed inlanguage laboratories around the world. Mostanimal researchers acknowledge that thecomprehension skills of nonhuman primates faroutreach their ability to produce language. Themost notable example of language skills in apeshas been demonstrated by Sue Savage-Rumbaugh’swork with Kanzi, a bonobo who spent almost20 years at the Language Research Lab at GeorgiaState University in Atlanta, Georgia, before beingrelocated to the Iowa Primate Learning Center inDes Moines, Iowa, in 2004. Kanzi is able torecognize more than 1,000 complex sentences.Savage-Rumbaugh, an animal psychologist,maintains that language is innate to all animals.Studies of bonobos have also shown that theycommunicate with one another vocally, symbolically,and visually. Verbally, bonobos are able to conveythreats, fear, or other emotions by their shrill calls.Symbolically, bonobos leave signs to guide oneanother toward sanctuary or away from danger.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APE L ANGUAGE 215

Visual communication is portrayed through facialexpressions and physical postures.

Chimpanzees, who share 99.4% of their geneswith humans, have been instrumental in expandingknowledge of the ability of nonhuman primates tocommunicate with humans. Working with severalchimpanzees, including Sarah who was born in1960 and has since become a celebrity amongthose who are interested in animal research, animalpsychologists David and Ann Premack have taughtchimpanzees to comprehend sentences by firstteaching them to recognize subjects and actions.The short sentences consisted of such combinationsas “cut apple,” “wash grapes,” or “give banana.”Initially, each plastic sign was presented along withits physical counterpart. Subsequent lessons taughtthe chimpanzees to differentiate between plasticsigns of one object and a physical presentation ofanother. For example, chimpanzees were able tounderstand that a plastic sign of a banana did notmatch an actual apple.

To test the ability of chimpanzees to reverseroles in communication as speaker and listenerhumans automatically do, David and Ann Premackagain used plastic signs to teach chimpanzees twodistinct languages. One language consisted ofwords used in production, while the other wasmade up of words used only for comprehension.Employing the production signs, the chimpanzeeswere able to make up sentences. The researchersused the second language to produce sentences forthe chimpanzees to read. While the chimpanzeesunderstood the words when given to them in theproper context, they did not initially recognizeproduction words offered in the context ofcomprehension, or vice versa. In subsequent tests,when only a few words were added to the oppositelexicon, with instructors teaching the chimpanzeesthat words formerly used only in comprehensioncould now be added to the production lexicon, allchimpanzees successfully accomplished thebidirectional task.

Researchers have repeatedly found that apesimitate the species that raise them. In the case oflaboratory animals, apes are likely to imitate thehumans who work with them. In fact, someresearchers have found that such apes so closelyassociate themselves with human trainers thatwhen asked to categorize humans and apes, they

see themselves as humans rather than apes. Someresearchers posit that the close relationshipbetween researchers and trainers and their subjectsmakes cross-species communication possible.

— Elizabeth Purdy

APE INTELLIGENCE

Because of their close genetic link to human beings,apes have been closely examined by anthropologistsand other scientists who are interested inestablishing the evolution of intelligence. Whilemost of the work on ape intelligence has been donewith chimpanzees, biologist Robert Shumaker,director of the Orangutan Language Project ofGeorge Mason’s Krasnow Institute, has spent yearstesting the intelligence of two orangutans at theNational Zoo in Washington, D.C. Two orangutansiblings, 26-year-old Azy and his sister, 24-year-oldIndah, relocated in September 2004 to the GreatApe Trust, the new primate sanctuary in DesMoines, Iowa, along with Shumaker. The orangutanis the rarest member of the great ape family. Only afew thousand are thought to exist in the Indonesianwild. All others are either in zoos or in researchlaboratories.

Through ongoing research, Shumaker and hiscolleagues contend that they have proved thatorangutans have the ability to both use andunderstand abstract thought.

Communicating through symbolic language, Azyand Indah were taught to identify specific imageson a computer screen. For instance, a squarepreceded all food words, and a circle came beforeall objects. In this way, Azy and Indah learned toask researchers for food or to perform tasks such asopening containers. Neither of the orangutans knewhow to count.

Shumaker and his colleagues also tested theability of orangutans to perform quantity judgmenttasks by teaching Azy and Indah to think beyondimmediate food gratification. They offered theorangutans two food choices with one to six grapes

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APES, FOSSIL216

4 APES, FOSSIL

Apes and humans, commonly referred to as homi-noids, are a closely related group of primatesclassified together in their own superfamily, theHominoidea. The living hominoids are subdividedinto two families, the Hylobatidae and the Hominidae(see table). The hylobatids or lesser apes (belongingto a single genus, Hylobates) are represented by 11 or

so species found throughout Southeast Asia. Humansand the great apes—the orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus),the gorilla (Gorilla gorilla), the common chimpanzee(Pan troglodytes), and the pygmy chimpanzee orbonobo (Pan paniscus)—are grouped together in theHominidae. In the past, the great apes were includedin a separate family, the Pongidae, but recent anatom-ical and molecular studies have shown that theAfrican apes (Gorilla and Pan) are more closelyrelated to humans than they are to the Asian orang-utan. The revised taxonomy better reflects, therefore,the phylogenetic relationships among members of theHominoidea.

The evolutionary history of the extant hominoidsis poorly known, with the notable exception ofhumans, which have a relatively complete fossilrecord extending back to more than 4 million yearsago. The earliest fossil apes that can be definitivelylinked to the living hylobatids are known from sites inChina dated to less than 1.5 million years ago, whilethe fossil record for the African apes is restricted to afew possible fragmentary finds reported from the lateMiocene and Pleistocene of East Africa, dating backto 6 million years ago. The evolution of the orangutanis, by comparison, much better documented. Fossilteeth from cave sites in Asia dating back to more than1 million years ago show that orangutans in the pastwere considerably larger than they are today, and thatunlike their living relatives, which are found only onSumatra and Borneo, they once had a wider distribu-tion in Southeast Asia that extended as far north assouthern China. In contrast to the paucity of fossilsavailable to trace the evolutionary history of homi-noids over the past 5 million years, there is a wealth ofevidence from the Miocene period (23–5 millionyears ago) to show that apes were once much morecommon and more diverse in the past than they aretoday.

The remains of the earliest apelike fossil primates,commonly known as proconsulids, have been recov-ered from sites in Kenya, Uganda, and Saudi Arabiadating to the late Oligocene and early Miocene(28–16 million years ago). There are a dozen speciesof proconsulids, ranging in size from the smallNyanzapithecus harrisoni (8 kg), which was about thesize of a modern-day black-and-white colobus mon-key, to Proconsul major (60–90 kg), which was the sizeof a female gorilla. Comparisons of their teeth, jaws,and skeletons indicate that proconsulids exhibited awide diversity of dietary and locomotor behaviors,

in each dish. The animals’ natural instinct was tochoose the dish containing the largest number offood items. During the test, researchers removed theorangutan’s first choice and gave them the other asa reward. Ultimately, the orangutans learned thatthey gained more by choosing the dish containingthe smaller amount of food.

Shumaker notes that chimpanzees, even thoughthey are believed to be more intelligent thanorangutans, have not mastered this level of abstractthought. In a 1995 study of two chimpanzees,consisting of 400 trials, Sarah T. Boysen and GaryG. Berntson failed to demonstrate this ability in twochimpanzees. Subsequent studies with chimpanzeesreported similar results, with the chimpanzeescontinuously opting for the dish with the mostcandy. The ability of chimpanzees to act in theirown interest is somewhat surprising considering thewell-documented ability of chimpanzees to masterthe ability to count. Earlier studies by Boysen andBerntson, for example, demonstrated the ability ofchimpanzees to add arrays of food placed in two orthree possible sites. A number of researchers whostudy chimpanzees insist that Shumaker and hiscolleagues have not proved that orangutans aremore intelligent than chimpanzees.

Overall, Shumaker and his colleagues speculatethat an animal’s mental ability is dependent on itssocial environment. Animals such as chimpanzeesthat must aggressively compete for food with othersin their group are less likely to have the option ofrational consideration of food choices than areorangutans, which are the least social species in thegreat ape family.

— Elizabeth Purdy

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APES, FOSSIL 217

Classification of Fossil and Living Hominoids

Superfamily Hominoidea

Family Proconsulidae

Afropithecus* (early Miocene, Kenya)Heliopithecus* (early Miocene, Saudi Arabia)Kamoyapithecus* (late Oligocene, Kenya)Mabokopithecus* (middle Miocene, Kenya)Nyanzapithecus* (early and middle Miocene, East Africa)Otavipithecus* (middle Miocene, Namibia)Proconsul* (early and middle Miocene, East Africa)Rangwapithecus* (early Miocene, East Africa)Turkanapithecus* (early Miocene, Kenya)

Family Hylobatidae

Hylobates (Pleistocene to Recent, Southeast Asia)

Family Hominidae

Subfamily Kenyapithecinae

Equatorius* (middle Miocene, Kenya)Griphopithecus* (middle Miocene, Turkeyand Central Europe)Kenyapithecus* (middle Miocene, Kenya)Nacholapithecus* (middle Miocene, Kenya)

Subfamily OreopithecinaePierolapithecus*Dryopithecus* (middle to late Miocene, Europe)Oreopithecus* (late Miocene, Italy)

Subfamily PonginaeAnkarapithecus* (late Miocene, Turkey)Gigantopithecus* (late Miocene to Pleistocene, Asia)Khoratpithecus* (late Miocene, Thailand)Lufengpithecus* (late Miocene, China)Pongo (Pleistocene to Recent, Southeast Asia)Sivapithecus* (middle to late Miocene, Indo-Pakistan)

Subfamily HomininaeArdipithecus* (late Miocene to early Pliocene, Ethiopia)Australopithecus* (Pliocene, Africa)Gorilla (Recent, Africa)Graecopithecus*(=Ouranopithecus)* (late Miocene, Greece)Homo (late Pliocene to Recent, worldwide)Orrorin* (late Miocene, Kenya)Pan (Recent, Africa)Paranthropus* (Pliocene to Pleistocene, Africa)Sahelanthropus* (late Miocene, Chad)Samburupithecus* (late Miocene, Kenya)

Uncertain taxonomic statusMorotopithecus* (early Miocene, Uganda)

* Denotes extinct apes

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APES, FOSSIL218

but they were typically arboreal quadrupeds that atevarious combinations of soft, ripe fruits and youngleaves. The best known species are Proconsul heseloni,Proconsul nyanzae, Turkanapithecus kalakolensis, andAfropithecus turkanensis. Recent studies have shownthat proconsulids represent either the earliest knownhominoids or primitive stem catarrhines (the groupthat gave rise to both Old World monkeys and apes).They are certainly more primitive than any of theliving apes, retaining generalized skulls and teeth, andmonkeylike postcranial skeletons. However, duringthe early Miocene, there was at least one species ofhominoid living in East Africa, Morotopithecus bishopi,which had already acquired some of the unique post-cranial features of modern apes. This species, fromMoroto in Uganda, dated to more than 20 millionyears ago, had specializations of the lumbar vertebraeand scapula, not found in the contemporary procon-sulids, that indicate that it had developed the stiff-backed, partially upright posture and suspensoryforelimbs that are characteristic of modern apes.

During the middle Miocene (16–10 million yearsago), conditions in East Africa became drier, cooler,and more seasonal, and open woodland habitatsreplaced the humid tropical forests typical of the earlyMiocene. These ecological changes coincided withthe appearance in East Africa of more advanced typesof apes, including the earliest true hominoids, aswell as stem hominids. The best known fossil apesfrom this time period are Equatorius, Kenyapithecusand Nacholapithecus, which are classified together askenyapithecines. Kenyapithecus is known only from ahandful of specimens from the locality of Fort Ternanin Kenya, whereas Equatorius and Nacholapithecus arerepresented by large samples of jaw fragments andisolated teeth, as well as partial skeletons, from severallocalities in Kenya. These apes are more derived thanthe proconsulids in having thickened enamel on theircheek teeth, more robust jaws, a simian shelf (a dis-tinctive bony buttress on the internal inferior surfaceof the front of the mandible), and relatively largerupper premolars. Their limb bones indicate that theywere probably more terrestrially adapted than procon-sulids, and they exhibit a number of specialized fea-tures for forelimb-dominated climbing that link themmore closely to modern hominoids. Nacholapithecus,at least, lacked a tail as in living apes. Another intrigu-ing fossil ape from this time period is Otavipithecusfrom Namibia, dated to approximately 13 millionyears ago, and the only Miocene hominoid species

recorded from southern Africa. Until recently, it wasknown only by a single lower jaw fragment, so its rela-tionship to other fossil and extant hominoids hasbeen difficult to establish. However, additional cranialand postcranial specimens of Otavipithecus have nowbeen discovered, and these suggest that it was moreclosely related to earlier proconsulids than to contem-porary apes from East Africa.

Up until the middle Miocene, hominoids wererestricted to Africa, but during this period theymigrated for the first time into Eurasia. The earliestEurasian hominoid, dated to 16–14 million years ago,is Griphopithecus, which has been found in Turkey andcentral Europe. The teeth and jaws are similar to thoseof Kenyapithecus from East Africa, to which it is proba-bly closely related. Once in Eurasia, hominoids becameestablished over a wide geographical region, extendingfrom Spain and France in Western Europe to easternChina, and they became increasingly diversified duringthe middle and late Miocene (16–5 million years ago).The best known fossil Eurasian hominoids areDryopithecus (Western and Central Europe), Pierolap-ithecus (Spain), Oreopithecus (Italy), Graecopithecus orOuranopithecus (Greece), Ankarapithecus (Turkey),Sivapithecus (Indo-Pakistan), and Lufengpithecus(China). Of these forms, Sivapithecus is clearly closelyrelated to the living orangutan because it shares manyunique specializations of its teeth and cranium withPongo, including thick-enameled cheek teeth, reducedupper lateral incisors and large central incisors, orbits(eye sockets) oval in shape and taller than they arebroad, narrow interorbital distance, lack of develop-ment of a distinctive bony bar above the orbits, adished face in profile, and a tiny incisive foramenpenetrating the palate. In contrast, the relationshipsof the other Eurasian Miocene hominoids to eachother and to living apes remain contentious. Anumber of alternative hypotheses about the interrela-tionships of Eurasian Miocene hominoids has beenproposed: (1) that they form a closely related groupwith the living orangutan, all being derived from acommon ancestor that migrated into Europe fromAfrica sometime during the middle Miocene; (2) thatsome of the Eurasian hominoids, such as Dryopithecusand Graecopithecus, are more closely related to theAfrican apes and humans than they are to Sivapithecusand the orangutan; and (3) that they represent adiverse group containing primitive hominoids, aswell as forms belonging to the orangutan and Africangreat ape lineages (see figure). The later Miocene apes

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APES, FOSSIL 219

from Asia, such as Ankarapithecus, Gigantopithecus,and Lufengpithecus, are possibly related to Pongo, butif they are, they are certainly more distantly relatedthan is Sivapithecus (see figure). The relationships ofLufengpithecus from the late Miocene (7–10 millionyears ago) from southern China are especially prob-lematic, because although its teeth are remarkablysimilar to those of living orangutans, even when com-pared with Sivapithecus it lacks the specialized fea-tures of the cranium shared by Sivapithecus andPongo. The recently described fossil ape from the lateMiocene of Thailand, Khoratpithecus, may provide animportant link between Sivapithecus and Pongo. Theabsence of a scar on the chin region of the mandiblefor the attachment of the anterior digastric muscle inKhoratpithecus is a peculiarity among hominoids thatis found only in orangutans.

The skeletons of Dryopithecus, Pierolapithecus, andOreopithecus are relatively well known, and they showthat these Western European apes were specialized forstiff-backed, forelimb-dominated arboreal climbing,clambering, and suspension, quite similar to modern

great apes, especially the orangutan. Although fewpostcranial remains of Lufengpithecus are known, theyindicate a similar locomotor pattern. Sivapithecus, bycontrast, living in the subtropical woodlands ofnorthern India and Pakistan, was primarily adaptedfor arboreal quadrupedal running and walking alonglarger branches, but it also probably spent time feed-ing on the ground. This is quite different from theuniquely specialized quadrumanous climbing andclambering locomotor pattern characteristic ofmodern orangutans. Later Miocene Eurasian homi-noids were specialized for a variety of different diets,ranging from leafy and fibrous foods in Oreopithecus,to hard seeds and nuts in Graecopithecus, to soft fruitsand young leaves in Dryopithecus and Sivapithecus.

An ecological shift from moist temperate and sub-tropical woodlands to drier, more seasonal habitatsduring the later Miocene coincided with a sharpdecline in the diversity of hominoids in Eurasia. Thisevent, which is dated to 9.6 million years ago inWestern Europe, has been dubbed the “VallesianCrisis” (the Vallesian is the European Land Mammal

Proc

onsu

lids

Keny

apith

ecus

Grip

hopi

thec

us

Mor

otop

ithec

us

Hyl

obat

es

Dry

opith

ecus

Ore

opith

ecus

pong

o

Siva

pith

ecus

Gig

anto

pith

ecus

Ank

arap

ithec

us

Lufe

ngpi

thec

us

Gra

ecop

ithec

us

Sam

buru

pith

ecus

Ard

ipith

ecus

Aus

tral

opith

ecus

Para

nthr

opus

Gor

illa

Pan

Hom

o

A cladogram illustrating the evolutionary relationships of some of the fossil and living apes

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APES, GREATER220

Age for this time period). The only survivor in Europetoward the end of the Miocene was Oreopithecus, ahighly specialized relative of Dryopithecus, whichwas isolated on a group of islands in the northernMediterranean that today form part of Italy. It sur-vived in isolation until about 7 million years agowhen the islands became connected to the Europeanmainland and allowed an influx of more competitivemammals, including monkeys. Lufengpithecus andSivapithecus, along with the aptly named Gigantop-ithecus, continue in the late Miocene of Asia. Thelatter ape was the largest known hominoid, withmassive jaws and teeth specialized for eating tough,fibrous vegetation, such as bamboo, and an estimatedbody weight that may have exceeded 200 kg (livingmale gorillas, by comparison, average only 170 kg).All of these Eurasian hominoids became extinct bythe close of the Miocene (5 million years ago) exceptfor Gigantopithecus, whose remains have been recov-ered from Pleistocene cave sites in southern Chinadated to less than 1 million years ago.

Hominoids also became extremely rare in Africaduring the late Miocene. A large fossil ape, Samburup-ithecus, known only by a single maxilla from Kenya(dated to 10–8 million years ago), may represent aclose relative of the African apes and humans. Untilrecently, a few isolated teeth of fossil hominoids fromthe late Miocene sites of Lukeino and Lothagam (dat-ing to 7–5 million years ago) in northern Kenya wereall that were available to document the earliest knownoccurrence of the human lineage prior to 5 millionyears ago, but the remains were too scrappy to be con-fident about their affinities or tell us much abouttheir anatomy. Then, beginning in the mid-1990s,paleontologists working in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Chadmade some remarkable discoveries that have helpedto fill this critical gap in the fossil record. The recentlydescribed Ardipithecus, Orrorin, and Sahelanthropus,dating from about 7 million years ago to 4.4 millionyears ago, are argued to be the earliest representativesof the human lineage. They each show a combinationof features that indicate reduced canine size andbipedal locomotion, both of which are unique featuresof later human ancestors. Most researchers agree thatthese fossil hominoids are close to the ancestry ofhumans, although there has been some debate aboutthe evidence presented in favor of this viewpoint. Theearliest definitive record of fossil hominoids that areclosely related to humans is known from the Pliocenewith the appearance of Australopithecus anamensis

from Kenya (4.2–3.9 million years ago) andAustralopithecus afarensis from Ethiopia and Tanzania(4.0–3.0 million years ago).

— Terry Harrison

Further Readings

Begun, D. R., Ward, C. V., and Rose, M. D. (1997).Function, phylogeny, and fossils: Miocene hominoidevolution and adaptations. New York: PlenumPress.

Fleagle, J. G. (1999). Primate adaptation and evolution.San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Hartwig, W. C. (Ed.). (2002). The primate fossil record.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

4 APES, GREATER

Current nomenclature divides the apes into two dis-tinct families: the greater apes and the lesser apes.Historically, apes were classified together in the familyPongidae, which excluded humans. Now there are twofamilies, Hominidae and Hylobatidae. The greater apescomprise the family Hominidae, consisting of gorillas,chimpanzees and bonobos, orangutans, and humans.There has been much discussion on the nomenclatureof the great ape. Current DNA evidence implies thathumans share a common ancestor with the chim-panzee/bonobo line and that this ancestor is extinct.On the primate family tree, humans separated muchmore recently than the gorilla did. When looking at thefamily tree, the four African great apes shared a com-mon ancestor between 8 and 10 million years ago, theorangutan and gorilla separating from the ancestralline prior to chimpanzees, bonobos, and humans.

With the advent of DNA analysis, a new under-standing of primate genetic diversity has come about.Chimpanzees, gorillas, humans, and orangutans areall more closely related to one another than any ofthese four genera are to the gibbons. Humans, chim-panzees, and bonobos share 98.4% of the same DNAsequence. Gorillas share 97.7% of their DNA withhumans, chimpanzees, and bonobos. Orangutansshare 96.4% of their DNA with humans, chimpanzeesand bonobos, and gorillas. One important differencebetween humans and great apes is humans’ compara-tive low level of genetic variation. Just like cheetahs,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APES, LESSER 221

which have little variation in theirgenes, humans went through a popu-lation bottleneck of approximately10,000 people, which greatly dimin-ished genetic variability. Signs of pastbottlenecks are also evident in thepopulations of western chimpanzees.

All living members of the familyHominidae have no tails and differfrom the lesser apes by being largerin size, spending more time upright,having fewer young, and having ahigher level of parental investment.Apes have five molars in the Y-5 pat-tern as compared to the Old Worldmonkeys, which have four molars ina bilophodont pattern. Apes have amore mobile spine compared to OldWorld monkeys. These are all anatomical adapta-tions to the apes’ vertical hanging and brachiationlocomotion. Except for gorillas and humans, all trueapes are agile climbers of trees. Their diets are bestdescribed as omnivorous, consisting of fruit, grassseeds, and in most cases small quantities of meateither hunted or scavenged, along with anything elseavailable and easily digested. Gorillas, chimpanzees.and bonobos live in Africa, in complex social groups.Orangutans live as solitary individuals in the forestsof Indonesia.

Apes’ forward-pointing eyes were used to spotpotential predators, prey, and social signals. An evolu-tionary adaptation to a life in socially complex groupsgave way to a large, complex brain. Chimpanzeesand orangutans are known to make simple tools toextract insects from holes and extract nuts from hardshells. Tool making involves a preconceived imageof what the tool will look like. The capacity to visual-ize the scenario is possible only with an advancedbrain. Orangutans have even been observed untyingknots, unscrewing large bolts, working out forthemselves the steps necessary to achieve a complextask. The hominids were able to master tool use andshape their environment. Great apes also have thecapacity to understand and communicate usingabstract symbols and gestures, such as American SignLanguage.

All ape species, except humans, are rare or endan-gered. All great ape loss, whether it be caused by habi-tat destruction, the pet trade, or the bushmeat trade,is a consequence of humans overpopulating the globe

at an alarming rate, resulting in social and environ-mental changes.

— Gregory Scott Hamilton

See also Apes, Lesser; Bonobos; Chimpanzees; Gorillas;Orangutans

Further Readings

Caccone A., & Powel, J. R. (1989). How closelyare humans related to other primates?DNA divergence among hominids. Evolution43, 925–942. The Great Ape Trust of Iowa,http://www.iowagreatapes.org/primates/

Fouts, R. (1997). Next of kin. New York: WilliamMorrow.

Steen, F. S. (2004). Communication Studies,University of California, Los Angeles. Ape diversity,http://www.cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/ApeDiversity.html2004; Paleoanthropology, http://cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/Paleoanthropology.html

4 APES, LESSER

Apes, in the past, have been classified as a single groupof primates. The current nomenclature divides apesinto two distinct families: the greater apes and the lesser

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APES, LESSER222

apes. The lesser apes are in the family Hylobatidae,consisting of 11 species that are currently recognizedin the family. Hylobates, the single genus ofHylobatidae, is divided into 4 subgenera: the Hoolockgibbon (Bunopithecus), the Lar gibbon (Hylobates),the Concolor gibbon (Nomascus), and the Siamang(Symphalangus). The term lesser ape implies thatwhile the gibbons are apes, they did not pursue thesame evolutionary line that gave rise to humans.While gibbons stayed in the trees, great apes engagedmore time on the ground.

The English translation for Hylobatidae is “treewalker.” Gibbons live in the forest canopy and infre-quently descend to the ground. Because they areabove everyone in the forest, they never battle withlarge predators or compete with other apes on theground. This lifestyle has enabled them to remainpetite and agile. Morphologically, their arms are themost exaggerated and the longest of all the primates.The arms end in long, slender hands, and the thumbis attached to the wrist instead of the palm. They usetheir hands like hooks to move through the forest.This type of locomotion is called brachiation. The

arm-over-arm movement enables the gibbon to gaingreat speed in the trees. By using their weight like apendulum, a gibbon can easily overtake a person run-ning on the forest floor. They can cover over 3 m in asingle swing. These lesser apes can also leap from astandstill from branch to branch, sometimes morethan 9 m in a single leap. With their extremely longarms and their hooklike hands, gibbons are magnifi-cent acrobats, perfectly adapted for a life in the forestcanopy.

Lesser apes are similar to monkeys, with longercanines, slender bodies, and two hard buttock pads,called ischial callosities. They are similar to the greatapes because they do not have a tail. Their skullsresemble those of hominids, with very short rostra,enlarged braincases, and large orbits that face for-ward. Their teeth are similar to hominids, as well,with similar grinding molars. The canines are promi-nent but not sexually dimorphic.

At night, the gibbon sleeps high up in the trees,sitting down on the ischial callosities or curled up onits side. It is the only ape that does not build a nest forsleeping. All gibbons are monogamous, and theirsocial group is based on a mated pair and their off-spring, averaging 3 to 4 members. A family may haveup to 3 to 4 juveniles aged 2 to 3 years apart. Allspecies of Hylobates are highly territorial. Defenserarely involves physical contact, but instead calling,chasing, and a whole host of theatrics, such as stickbreaking and thrashing of vegetation. The spacing ofdifferent groups is accomplished by loud vocaliza-tions that can carry for several kilometers. Siamangscall out about 30% of the day, and other gibbons80% to 90% of the day.

— Gregory Scott Hamilton

See also Apes, Greater; Gibbons; Siamangs

Further Readings

Meyers, P. (2000). Hylobatidae. http://www.animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Hylobatidae.html

Nowak, R. M. (1999). Walkers mammals of the world(6th ed. Vol. 1). Baltimore: Johns HopkinsUniversity Press.

Rowe, N. (1996). The pictorial guide to the livingprimates. East Hampton, New York: PogoniasPress.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

APOLLONIAN 223

4 APOLLONIAN

Apollonian refers to something or someone present-ing the main characteristics of Apollo. Apollo wasone of the gods of the ancient Greeks, son of Zeusand Leto, and twin brother of Artemis. He was thedivinity linked to sunlight but also to the punish-ment of impiety by the infliction of diseases, protect-ing health, music, and divination. His Oracle atDelphi was the most consulted one in the ancientworld, by persons as well as by whole cities. Apollowas therefore considered as a “guide,” in political andmoral matters. At the 7th to 6th century BC, thosewho were called “the seven wise men” of Greece ded-icated to the Delphic Oracle the quintessence of theirwisdom, in the form of brief recommendations,which were supposed to illustrate the “apollonian”way of behaving in life. The most well-known ofthese “delphic precepts” are “Know Thyself,” and “DoNothing Excessive.”

Inspired by some of the god’s characteristics,the German philosopher and classicist FriedrichNietzsche (1844–1900) presented his personal inter-pretation of what might be called “apollonian.” In hisbook The Birth of Tragedy from the Spirit of Music(Die Geburt der Tragödie aus dem Geiste der Musik,1871), Nietzsche considered Apollo as the divine rep-resentation of the perfectly plastic beauty (found inthe arts of sculpture and epic poetry) of the principlesof measure and “individu-ation.” The “apollonian”way of being underlinesthe value of the individualand creates the cities.

Dionysus, son of Zeusand Semele, the god of wine,natural fertility, orgiastic fes-tivals, and sacred frenzy,who officially occupied theDelphic Oracle during win-tertime, while his brotherApollo was visiting theHyperboreans, was used bythe German philosopher asthe symbolic counterpartof Apollo. Nietzsche quali-fied as “dionysian” the art ofmusic, but also the will forlife itself, the dynamic and

explosive essence of nature, a whole to which man isintegrated. Dionysian ecstasy delivers man from thelimits of his own self and guides him to the originalhappy unity with the universe. The “dionysian” visionisn’t bound to moral restrictions; it follows the eternalgame of life, beyond the notions of good and evil.Nietzsche presented himself as “dionysian” in his wayof thinking and being.

With reference to his teacher’s Arthur Schopen-hauer (1788–1860) categories, established in hiswork The World as Will and as Representation (DieWelt als Wille und als Vorstellung, 1819), the “will” ofthe world is “dionysian,” whereas the “representation”is “apollonian.”

For Nietzsche, the ancient Greek tragedy resultedfrom the harmonious meeting of the “apollonian” andthe “dionysian” spirit. Its extraordinary aesthetic andmetaphysical quality is due to the fact that the tragicpoets (up to Euripides, who “destroys” tragedy, accord-ing to the philosopher, by introducing too much rea-soning on the stage) realized the perfect equilibriumbetween myth and music, between the original naturalpassions and their idealized representation.

Nietzsche thought that all true art should be able todo the same. His aesthetic theories are directly con-nected to his metaphysics, as art, especially music, isfor him one of the most important means of revealingthe nature of the world and of the human condition.


Source: © iStockphoto/Yusuf Demirelli.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AQUATIC APE HYPOTHESIS224

Further Reading

Goold, G. P. (Ed.). (1972). Diogenes Laertius: Livesand opinions of eminent philosophers (Rev. ed.,R. D. Hicks, Trans.). Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.

4 AQUATIC APE HYPOTHESIS

In 1960, Sir Alister Hardy, a marine biologist knightedfor his contribution to the fisheries industry, gave atalk at the British Sub-Aqua Club (a scuba-divingclub) and a month later published an article in NewScientist on that talk, called “Was Man More Aquaticin the Past?” Although the idea caught people’s fan-cies and garnered some attention by the newspapers,it showed little sign of the long-lasting popular appealit would eventually have.

It didn’t happen overnight. Even with the originalarticle and a follow-up transcript from a radio pro-gram, it was 7 years before Hardy’s idea got muchnotice—this time with a two-page write-up byDesmond Morris in The Naked Ape.

Elaine Morgan, at the time an Oxford graduate inEnglish and a TV scriptwriter, entered the scene in1972 with the book Descent of Women, the idea forwhich she got from Desmond Morris’s book. Thisbook proved to be very popular, and in time Morganfollowed it up with many articles as well as four morebooks on the subject (in 1982, 1990, 1994, and 1997).

During the 1980s, other proponents arrived on thescene, chief among them a medical doctor fromBelgium, Marc Verhaegen. A 1987 conference on thesubject resulted in a book presenting opposing views,The Aquatic Ape: Fact or Fiction?

The coming of age of the Internet in the 1990sbrought the advent of the online venue for presenta-tion and debate, and this subject proved popular. Aswith many subjects connected with humans andespecially human evolution, much of the debate israncorous and ill-informed. There are nuggets of goldin the online debate; however, just as with the min-eral, finding these nuggets requires a lot of panning.

The Aquatic Ape Theory or Aquatic Ape Hypothe-sis (aka AAT or AAH—this entry will refer to it asthe AAT/H) hypothesizes that humans went throughan aquatic or semiaquatic stage in our evolution,

generally said to have occurred during the transitionfrom the last common ancestor we shared with apes(LCA) to hominids (some, like Marc Verhaegen, claimit continued on through virtually the entire span ofhuman evolution). It claims that certain features areseen in human anatomy and physiology that are onlyseen in humans and aquatic animals and that theseconstitute conclusive evidence that our ancestorswent through an semiaquatic phase in our evolution.Relying heavily on the principle of convergent evolu-tion, it says that life in an aquatic environmentexplains these features and that a transition from apeto hominid in a nonaquatic environment cannot. Theprinciple of convergence is used to explain thesefeatures, and the idea is said to be more parsimoniousthan other hypotheses.

Their use of the idea of convergence is generallyaccurate, but generally, they use parsimony to meanthat only one cause explains many features (a moreaccurate term might be “prime mover” or “umbrellahypothesis,” the latter being one that AAT/H criticJohn Langdon uses).

One problem with the idea is that most of the pro-ponents have been rather vague about the degree ofaquaticness to which they refer. One proponent, doc-toral student Algis Kuliukas, has come up with anexplanation apparently also now endorsed by ElaineMorgan, that water has acted as more of an agent ofselection in human evolution than in the evolution ofapes such that physical differences between the twomay be at least partly explained as adaptations to moreefficient movement through acquatic conditions. Thisdefinition is perhaps most notable for its vagueness,merely suggesting “more” water use by humans thanby apes. Contrast that with the explanation set forthin by Bininda-Emonds, Gittleman, and Kelly: “Weconsider aquatic carnivores to be those species inwhich the aquatic habitat inevitably plays a key rolein the life-cycle of an individual,” which they thencompare to definitions as given by others as they dis-cuss the strengths and limitations of their own defini-tion. The AAT/H definition suggested is not only sovague as to be virtually meaningless, it is notable thatthis is the first attempt at such an explicit definition,and it has taken over 40 years to show up. There hasalways been an implicit “how aquatic” definition, how-ever, ascertained by the characteristics the proponentshave used to build their case.

The proponents of the AAT/H have almost alwaysbeen vague about just how aquatic our ancestors

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AQUATIC APE HYPOTHESIS 225

supposedly were, and now tend to say simply thoseancestors were “more aquatic” than apes, and oftenuse Alister Hardy’s suggestion that we were lessaquatic than otters. Coupled with this, they are oftencoy about what animals are said to share our“aquatic” features, sometimes simply saying thatthese features are found in an aquatic setting or thatwe share these features with “aquatics.” This producesa disconnect between how aquatic most AAT/H pro-ponents claim our ancestors were and what the ideaclearly implies on this vital aspect.

The human features said to be accounted for bya semiaquatic past can vary a great deal from oneAAT/H account to another, but they form a large andeclectic list, far too large to deal with here (variousproponents have suggested sweat, tears, sebaceousglands, the shape of our nose and our thorax, andeven being able to cup our hands better than chimps).Probably the most commonly cited features arebipedalism, fat characteristics, and the distributionof human hair. AAT/H proponents concede thatbipedalism is not found in any aquatic or semiaquaticmammal. They use a double standard here, as theycommonly argue that the idea that hominids evolvedbipedality in a terrestrial setting is badly damagedby the fact that no nonhuman terrestrial mammal ispredominantly bipedal, yet the fact that no aquaticmammal is bipedal is brushed off as irrelevant.

The mammals with the fat features the AAT/Hproponents say are similar to ours are seals, whales,and the sirenia (dugongs and manatees) and for less-ened hair, only whales and sirenia and one species ofwild pig, the babirusa, which has less hair than otherwild pigs and is at home in water but also seems to be,like humans, an exception, since other wild pigs thatare at home in the water have plenty of body hair; thebabirusa seems to be, like other mammals with less-ened body hair (such as some mole rats), an excep-tion among related mammals with similar habits. Thepachyderms also have little body hair, and althoughthis is generally accepted as being due to their size andthe need for heat loss, this well-established physiolog-ical principle concerning volume versus surface areais viewed with suspicion by many AAT/H proponentsas they concentrate on water as a guiding factor inevolution. So, the aquatic mammals the proponentssay we resemble have all been aquatic for tens ofmillions of years and are so highly specialized theyare virtually, or completely, incapable of living a non-aquatic life. The AAT/H claim that these features

arose in a mammal less aquatic than an otter ringshollow.

So, relative fattiness and body hair loss amongaquatic species are actually restricted to only a veryfew highly specialized aquatic mammals. Even moredamaging to the AAT/H is that these features inaquatic animals do not actually resemble those ofhumans in any but the most superficial manner. Thishas particular significance in light of the AAT/Hclaim to be more parsimonious than other theories.

Most humans are fatter than many wild mammals,and we have, on average, less body hair than apes andmost other wild mammals. But the characteristics ofhuman hair and fat—the differences between thesexes and during the individual’s lifespan—are notlike hair and fat features due to convergent evolutiondue to environment. Instead, those characteristics inhumans seem to be classic cases of sexual selection.They differ considerably between the sexes, changedramatically at puberty, and then change again at theend of the reproductive period of life. (We are alsounusual in having rather fat babies, but that seems tobe connected to the fact that our infancy and accom-panying brain growth is itself a highly unusual affairamong primates, or any other mammal.) In aquaticmammals, these fat and hair characteristics eitherstart out similar to adults of their species or becomelike adults of their species very rapidly after birth.This is also true of other features that AAT/H propo-nents use or have used as evidence, such as sweat andsebaceous glands.

The problem vis-à-vis parsimony is that if thesewere due to convergence during a semiaquatic past,the AAT/H requires two major changes to these fea-tures instead of one: first, ancestral, then similar toaquatic mammals, then sexually selected as in modernhumans. Other hypotheses would require only onechange, perhaps gradual: first ancestral, then sexuallyselected, albeit perhaps with some supporting advan-tages in natural selection (such as Wheeler’s coolinghypothesis or the recent idea that elimination of someparasites had a hand in our present hair characteris-tics). So, the AAT/H claim to be a more parsimoniousexplanation for these features falls apart.

Explanations for these discrepancies have beenoffered. Sometimes proponents actually suggest thatthe degree of aquaticness in hominids varied betweenthe sexes and during the lifespan, so as to match thecharacteristics we see today. Since both sebaceousglands and hair are used as evidence, the hypothesis

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AQUATIC APE HYPOTHESIS226

becomes internally inconsistent, since then femaleswould have to be more aquatic than males to explainhair and body fat, while males would have to be moreaquatic than females to explain sebaceous glands;babies would be aquatic to explain hair and bodyfat, but not very aquatic to explain sweat and seba-ceous glands, while these same characteristics inchildren would mean they were relatively nonaquaticuntil puberty. These ad hoc explanations seem muchmore unlikely than the simple explanation of sexualselection.

There are other problems with AAT/H attempts toexplain human hair as the result of some degree ofaquaticness. The only reasonable suggestion as to whybody hair would be reduced is to aid in swimmingspeed (some take the tack that it just is similar to aquaticmammals and offer no reason for the similarity—however, as mentioned already, it is not really similar).There is, however, conflicting evidence on body hairand swimming speed; it would seem that increasingbody hair might work as well as eliminating it, buthumans took neither course. We still have body hair,and many humans have quite a lot of it, often curly andjust what we don’t want for increased swimmingspeed. That is why competitive swimmers use one orboth of two methods—they shave off body hair andrecently many have adopted special body suits thatincrease boundary layer thickness and decrease dragby mimicking the effects of dermal ridges as seen indolphins’ skin or the hair of seals. The one thing com-petitive swimmers don’t want is what we have now, yetwhat we have now is what AAT/H proponents say wasdue to adaptation for swimming speed. And thenthere is the hair on our heads, which is far longer, andoften bushier, than that of apes. So, the AAT/H propo-nents are left with several ad hoc explanations Theyhave suggested that head hair is explained by a swim-ming stroke, usually said to be the breast stroke, whichleaves the long head hair (and beard in males) entirelyout of the water—and this unlikely position is sup-posed to be one which allows for high swimmingspeeds creating selection for hair loss. Otherwise, theyare faced with claiming that there was intense environ-mental selective pressure for reduction of body hairbut not for head hair. The only other explanationwould be that there were two major changes to hairinstead of one as required for nonaquatic hypotheses,which destroys their claim of parsimony.

The problem of likely aquatic predators such ascrocodiles and sharks being much faster swimmers

than even the best human athletes today is met withthe suggestion that we congregated in large groupsand the aquatic predators would only catch the slowermembers. This is unlikely to have helped even if true,since aquatic predators are seldom seen before theystrike and would not have to take the slowest swim-mers even if the herding idea was true. Still, that isbetter than Morgan’s first attempt to answer the prob-lem of crocodiles, which was to label them “hypothet-ical.” No credible suggestion of how these ancestorswould meet the problem of aquatic predators has everbeen produced. Another problem for the hypothesisis the fact that while terrestrially we can show howan animal of medium size with a low birthrate can,and still does, deal with predators, by studying chim-panzees, no aquatic or semiaquatic animal of mediumsize with a low birthrate exists.

A common argument for the AAT/H over the yearshas been the fact that many humans like to visit theseashore, and many humans like to swim for recre-ation. This race memory argument has been used byboth Hardy and Morgan (Hardy in particular believedin the race memory idea as part of his long-held beliefthat race memories and telepathy had played a role inhuman evolution) and carries no more weight, andperhaps less, than Gordon Orians’s idea that our likingfor certain park settings is based on our evolutionarypast on mixed savannas. Lately, the subject of fattyacids for brain growth, specifically DHA and LNA,have been promoted as support for the idea of anaquatic past, since marine fish, especially cold-watermarine fish, are rich in DHA. This ignores the fact thatthese fatty acids are readily available in various plantsources as well as in wild game. Humans (exceptinfants) can synthesize DHA from LNA found in plantfoods; infants get it through breast milk.

Some evidence long used as support for the AAT/Hhas been dropped by its proponents, such as Morgan’scontention that sweat and tears were analogous to saltexcretion glands, as seen in marine and desert reptilesand birds. The problem here is that even when thisnotion was first put forward, it ran counter to basicphysiological principles in osmoregulation, includingthe fact that such excretions are never hypertonic,as they would have to be to be part of such a system.When Morgan formally dropped this line of evidence,she claimed it was because new information had beendiscovered that wasn’t available when she first pro-posed it, but in fact the contrary information wasknown well before she first brought it up, and some of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AQUATIC APE HYPOTHESIS 227

that information was in the references she used as thesources for her claims. This does not speak well of thereliability of AAT/H research, and is not unusual.

Morgan has used a passage about bradycardia inseals, the slowing of the heart, as evidence about breathholding before dives. Morgan has also incorrectlystated that hymens are only found in humans andaquatic mammals; that humans, bonobos, and aquaticmammals are the only ones that engage in ventro-ven-tro copulation; that seals sweat via eccrine glands; thatthe only nonhuman animals that have been reported—none confirmed—to cry emotional tears are aquaticones (information to the contrary was in the samebook and chapter Morgan used as a source); and thatthe predominate mode of terrestrial locomotion ofproboscis monkeys is bipedal. Morgan also has provedto exhibit something of a free hand when it comes toquotes in some of her AAT/H accounts, leaving outwords or context to change their meaning, often with-out indicating the words are absent.

Marc Verhaegen has a history of dubious research.For example, he has claimed that sea lions are, afterhumans, the mammals that use sweat cooling themost, but in fact sea lions’ sweating mechanisms arenot very efficient at all, unlike those of a variety of ter-restrial mammals—that information was in sourcesthat he referenced. Verhaegen has also suggested thatNeandertal noses acted as snorkels and that ear canalexotoses, seen in a small number of Neandertal anderectus specimens, can only mean they were doinga great deal of swimming and diving. Problems withthis are that such exotoses also result from exposureto cold air without swimming or diving, and it seemsthat a pathological condition would be weeded out ina species that was long adapted for swimming anddiving. Other examples of the quality of his researchinclude his description of the rhinoceros as “predom-inantly aquatic” and using the mountain beaver as anexample of an aquatic mammal, apparently confusedby the name (the mountain beaver often likes wetareas and burrows and succulent plants, but damp-ness does not make one aquatic in any realistic sense).

These are far from the only examples of poorAAT/H research, and unfortunately they typify thequality of research one sees when the idea is exam-ined closely.

In recent years, proponents have paid a great dealof attention to the research on chimpanzees andgorillas that wade, along with any information aboutbonobos wading. This is an abrupt about-face, since

as late as the mid-1990s, most were claiming as evidencethe “fact” that common chimpanzees avoided waterat all costs (a common misconception disproved wellbefore that). The amount of bipedality in these situa-tions is often wildly overstated by proponents, andanother problem the AAT/H faces with these andother primate species that wade or swim regularlyis that these species don’t exhibit the other changes theAAT/H predicts—changes such as fat and lessenedbody hair—but this problem is either downplayed orignored. It is interesting that bonobos and other apessometimes use bipedality when wading, and it is cer-tainly one of the items on the list of things that apessometimes use bipedality while doing, but the AAT/Hattempts to be far more than one item on a list.

In summary, the AAT/H has been in existence forwell over 40 years now, and while it has certainlyattracted a following, it hasn’t been very convincingto most anthropologists who’ve looked at it closely.Its proponents tend to use to their advantage the factthat most people accept the proponents’ accounts ofthe features mentioned and assume that the pro-ponents have been somewhat rigorous and honestin testing their theory against the evidence. And fewpeople are conversant with all the varied lines of evi-dence that its proponents use. Perhaps a greater prob-lem is that most people accept the proponents’ claimthat they are doing no more than suggesting thathumans used water somewhat more than apes duringthe evolution of our species—certainly a noncontro-versial claim, but a disingenuous one as well when yousee what features the AAT/H claims as evidence.

— Jim Moore

See also Adaptations, Biological

Further Readings

Bininda-Emonds, O. R. P., Gittleman, J. L., & Kelly,C. K. (2001). Flippers versus feet: Comparativetrends in aquatic and non-aquatic carnivores.Journal of Animal Ecology, 70, 386–400.

Morgan, E. (1990). The scars of evolution. London:Souvenir Press.

Morgan, E. (1997). The aquatic ape hypothesis.London: Souvenir Press.

Roede, M., Wind, J., Patrick, J. M., & Reynolds, V.(Eds.). (1991). The aquatic ape: Fact or fiction?London: Souvenir Press.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

AQUINAS, THOMAS (1225–1274)228

4 AQUINAS, THOMAS (1225–1274)

Italian Dominican priest, philosopher, and theologian(Angelic Doctor of the Church), Thomas Aquinas wasnoted for systemizing theology by infusing ancientGreek philosophy, particularly Aristotle, with divinerevelation as depicted by Judeo-Christian faith. Born atRoccasecca to nobleman Count Landulf and CountessTheodora (related to Emperor Fredrick II and Royaltyin Spain and France), Aquinas received a classical edu-cation from the Benedictine monks at Monte Cassinoand later received higher instruction (Trivium andQuadrivium) at the University of Naples. Aquinas, botheducated and wealthy, rejected the rewards of the privi-leged class in favor of a humble and contemplative lifeassociated with religious orders. Although the reasonsfor Aquinas wanting to join the Order of St. Dominicare a point of speculation, the news of Aquinas’s entryinto religious life was not well received by all; particu-larly by his mother Theodora, who imprisoned him foralmost 2 years behind the walls of San Giovanni. Ashe was unrelenting in discerning his vocation, Theodoraeventually released him to the Dominican Order.

After close inspection by Dominican superiors andPope Innocent IV, Thomas Aquinas took his vows andcontinued his vocation to fulfillment. Among theadministrative works, teaching, and ministry, Aquinasattended the University of Paris. Despite conflictbetween the university and religious Orders over anoath of loyalty, which ultimately caught the attention ofboth civil and papal authorities alike, Thomas Aquinasreceived a degree of Doctor of Theology in 1257. Beforehis death in 1274, Thomas Aquinas was known forhis intelligence and reserved nature. Toward the endof his life, Aquinas was said to have had more frequentreligious experiences (ecstasy) that would eventuallylead him to quit writing in 1273. Aquinas’s writingsare profound and influential. Among these writingsinclude two important writings: Summa de veritatecatholicae fidei contra gentiles (1252–1259) and Summatheologica (1266–1273). Thomas Aquinas was canon-ized by Pope John XXII in 1323, and Pope Leo XIIIdeclared Aquinas’s written works as the true philosophyof the church in 1879.

Contributions and Perspectives

The influences of Thomas Aquinas upon philosophy(particularly in ethics), theology, and science are

profound. Although his writings are directed towardinfidels (Jews and Arabs), heretics, and schismatics,Aquinas infused basic Aristotelian principles withsacred scripture to establish a cogent basis for theology.As put forth by the philosophy of Aquinas (subse-quently supported by ecclesiastical authorities), thefoundations for Catholic theology are threefold: theexistence of God, the existence of humankind (in rela-tion to themselves and to God), and revelation (as perChrist). From the five proofs of God’s existence (forexample, an unmoved mover, first cause, necessarybeing, absolute perfection, and intelligence), God notonly created humankind (fixed) in His image (intel-lect) but also instilled a directive, via eternal law, nat-ural law, and revelation, for humankind’s theologicallyjustified ontology and teleology. Good (being) and evil(privation) are part of an indeterminable array of the-istic determinates. Humankind’s existence (as with allexistence), from beginning to end (including the eter-nal soul), is an expression of His will and as the ulti-mate end in itself. This theological view provided botha geocentric and anthropocentric view of our species.

Thomism, though it has experienced deaths andrevivals, remains the cornerstone of Catholic philoso-phy. Surviving philosophical attacks from OrthodoxGreeks, Martan Luther, and the philosophies of ratio-nalists and empiricists, the foundational assertions thatprovided Thomism its logical cohesion began to slowlyerode away in light of critical evaluation and scientificadvancements. Ironically, it was science, the samescience that was considered in the realm of philosophy,which produced the greatest problem for Thomism.Challenges from Bruno, Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileohad contributed evidence in support of heretical views.However, it was Charles Darwin (1809–1882) who pro-vided a cogent theory based on observations, that beingthe theory of organic evolution. Consisting of commondescent, multiplication of species, gradualism, andnatural selection, Darwin provided an explanationfor diverse life forms on this planet. The metaphysicalimplications are evident; the evidence for a God(designer), the soul, and afterlife are rejected in lightof evidence and rational explanation. Although thephilosophies/theology of Fr. Pierre Teilhard de Chardinincorporates a mystical interpretation of evolution,Pope John Paul II (as with previous popes) reaffirmedThomism as the foundational philosophy of the Church.


See also Religion and Anthropology

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ARB OREAL HYPOTHESIS 229

Further Readings

O’Meara, T. F. (1997). Thomas Aquinas theologian.South Bend, IN: Notre Dame University Press.

Torrell, J.-P., & Royal, R. (1996). Saint ThomasAquinas: The person and his work. Washington,DC: Catholic University of America Press.

4 ARBOREAL HYPOTHESIS

Researchers in biology have often directed their effortstoward elucidating the origins of major phyla or clas-sification groups. While we have paid the most atten-tion to the larger questions of transitions betweenclasses, we are also considerably interested in theorigins of orders. Cladistic methodology demands thatwe identify synapomorphies that define different ordersbut, as Matt Cartmill pointed out in 1972, it has notalways been easy to identify the adaptive shift thataccompanied the origin of a new order. The classMammalia has been particularly troublesome in thisregard. The interpretation of primate origins is anespecially good illustration of the relationship betweenthe characters used to define the taxon and the adap-tive zone reconstructed for the order.

Historically, we have considered the primatesdifficult to define. George Gaylord Simpson stated thisexplicitly when he wrote that no clear-cut diagnosticadaptation distinguishes primates from other “primi-tive” placental mammals. The problem is particularlywell exemplified by the controversy between thosewho would assign the treeshrews to the primates,such as Sir Wilfrid E. Le Gros Clark, and those whowould not, such as Robert D. Martin and Leigh VanValen. Workers have sought to define the primates bya distinguishing complex of evolutionary trendsinstead of defining the order by a single anatomicalfeature. In The Antecedents of Man, Clark summarizesthe evolutionary trends, including generalized limbstructure with pentadactyly and retention of skeletalelements including the clavicle that are reduced orlost in other mammalian orders; mobile digits, espe-cially the pollex and hallux, for grasping; presenceof flat nails and sensitive tactile pads instead of com-pressed claws; reduction of the snout and olfactoryapparatus; elaboration of the visual apparatus anddevelopment of binocular vision; and the enlargementand development of the brain, especially the cerebral

cortex. John and Prue Napier suggested additionaltrends, including the development of truncal upright-ness or orthogrady.

Arboreal Theory:Elliot Smith, Wood Jones, Clark

A major paradigm, the arboreal theory of primateorigins, defines primates by a complex of charactersthat adapted them to arboreal life. Indeed, we canfind virtually all of the trends listed in the precedingsection in the writings of the first exponents of thearboreal theory. It was first formulated by GraftonElliot Smith and his assistant, Frederic Wood Jones,in the early decades of the 20th century by the studyof comparative anatomy.

Elliot Smith, a neuroanatomist, was interested inexplaining the distinguishing features of primatebrains. In his address at Dundee to the Anthropo-logical Section of the British Association for theAdvancement of Science, he stated that it was the evo-lution of the brain and the ability to learn that led tothe origin of the mammals, and that we should payparticular attention to the development of the cerebralcortex in primate evolution. Elliot Smith observedthat orders of mammals became successful specialistsfor modes of life that depended on flight, fast run-ning, or aquatic existence. They lost, however, theirprimitive simplicity and plasticity of structure. Incontrast, the primates did not become narrowlyspecialized. Elliot Smith considered treeshrews tobe insectivores, but he began a tradition in physicalanthropology by using them in reconstructing theadaptations that gave rise to the primates. He believedthat olfaction was the dominant sense in early mam-mals, which were essentially terrestrial. Natural selec-tion would favor reduction of the olfactory apparatusand increased development of the neocortex (neopal-lium) of the cerebrum in arboreal mammals. Thearboreal existence favors the development of vision,touch, hearing, agility, and quickness of movementwhile limiting the utility of smell. Small arboreal earlyprimates could maintain the plasticity of a general-ized structure while their brains developed. ElliotSmith pointed to tarsiers as manifesting significantreduction in the size of the olfactory parts of thebrain and an increase in the visual cortex of the neo-cortex. He argued that the entire neocortex wasaffected by the emphasis on vision rather than smell.The sense of touch also became enhanced, and this

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ARB OREAL HYPOTHESIS230

assisted vision in the conscious appreciation of theenvironment and in the performance of agile locomo-tor behaviors. Hearing increased in importance, andthe corresponding portion of the cortex expanded. Thesechanges, while increasing the size of the brain andincreasing agility, would not modify the primitive char-acters of the limbs and body. Elliot Smith stated that theinteraction of tactile and kinesthetic senses with visiondeveloped the cortex and stimulated the process of spe-cialization of a mechanism for regulating the action ofthe cerebral cortex (an organ of attention to efficientlymanage the nervous centers controlling muscles of thebody). He ultimately derived the hominin prefrontalarea from reliance on vision rather than smell.

Elliot Smith used the figure reprinted here tosupport his thesis that the olfactory region became

relatively reduced and the visual, tactile, motor, andauditory areas expanded during primate evolution.He related the expansion of the frontal (“prefrontal”)region to learning to perform skilled movements andstereoscopic vision. He stated that the changes are theresult of adoption of arboreal habits.

Wood Jones, in his landmark Arboreal Man,drew his evidence from a wider range of anatomicalregions than did Elliot Smith. He discussed sensoryand cerebral topics in the latter chapters of his book,but was also concerned with skeletal and muscularevidence. His elaboration of Elliot Smith’s thesisreflected his interest in the anatomy of the limbs andemphasizes the functional differentiation of thefore- and hindlimbs. The ancestral primate was arbo-real in the late Triassic, and its limbs had not become

Brain of the Jumping Shrew(Macroscelides)

Brain of the Tarsier (Tarsius) Brain of the Marmoset

(Hapale)

Brain of the Tree Shrew (Tupaia)

Visual

Visual

VisualVisual

Olfactory

Olfactory

Tactile

Motor

Prefrontal

Olfactory

Acoustic

Olfactory

Figure 1 The left side of the brain of an elephant shrew (top left) compared with that of a treeshrew, tarsier, and marmoset

Source: Adapted from G. Elliot Smith (1924), Figure 15. By permission of Oxford University Press.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


CreodontaINSECTIVORA(menotyphla)

Lemuroidea

Prosimiae primitivae

Tarsioidea Tree shrew

Galeopithecus

Chiropter

MONKEYS

Platyrrhini

CatarrhiniLemurinae

Fayum faunaANTHROPOID APES

Propliopithecus

MacacusOrangChimpanzee

GorillaGalago

LemurTarsius

Cebus

HOMINIDAE

HUMANFAMILY

Sivalik fauna

Pliopithecus

Old world monkeys

Cretaceous

Eocene,800 ft.

Oligocene, 500 ft.

Miocene, 1000 ft.

Pliocene, 260 ft.

Pleistocene, 200 ft.

Recent, 200 ft.

HOMO

X

X

New world monkeys

Hesperopithecus

Pithecanthropus

Gibbon

Lorisin

Figure 2 Elliot Smith derived the primates from a group of insectivores that included tree shrews and elephant shrews as Mentophyla.

He derived New and Old World monkeys, apes, and hominins from a “tarsioid” ancestor; in a recent classification, Colin Groves assigned

the Tarsiiformes as the sister group to the Simiiformes within the Haplorrhini. Elliot Smith used Tarsius as a model for the tarsioid stage,

manifesting considerable development of the visual portion and reduction of the olfactory portion of the brain, reduction of the snout,

orbital convergence, and binocular vision. He believed, however, that tarsiers are unable to perceive texture and the details of objects.

Wood Jones strongly emphasized a tarsier-like, rather than an anthropoid ape, model in human evolution

Source: Adapted from G. Elliot Smith (1924), Figure 2. By permission of Oxford University Press.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


specialized for pronograde cursorial locomotion.Locomotion in the arboreal context favored use of theforelimb for grasping supports with the palm againstthe substrate, retention of a clavicle, and use of thehindlimb parallel to the axis of the vertebral columnfor supporting the animal. Wood Jones used theterm emancipation of the forelimb to indicate thatthe forelimb was no longer used solely for support.Postulated reduction of olfaction, caused by arborealhabits, resulted in the reduction of the facial skeleton.The latter led to a drawing of the eyes toward themidline. The increased specialization of the limbsresulted in a more upright posture with associatedchanges in the gastrointestinal tract, reproductiveorgans, and axial skeleton. Indeed, Wood Jonesconsidered arboreal uprightness to be basal to thedevelopment of human terrestrial uprightness: Heexplicitly stated that arboreal uprightness precededterrestrial uprightness. In Man’s Place Among theMammals, he further proposed that hominins aredescended from an orthograde tarsier-like ancestor.To counter the objection that other orders of mam-mals include arboreal forms, many of which are dis-similar to primates in their adaptations, Wood Jonesused two arguments: The first was that arboreal repre-sentatives of other orders are secondarily arboreal,that is, their ancestors were terrestrial, pronogradequadrupeds; in his view, this was not true of the pri-mates. Second, his law of successful minimal specializa-tion stated that the specializations of other forms ofarboreal mammals (such as sloths) imperil their fur-ther “evolutionary progress”; in contrast, the primatesshow the “maximum of possibilities.”With his empha-sis on the importance of a mobile, grasping forelimb,Wood Jones viewed the use of suspensory postures bythe feet as a “pitfall of specialization” and stated thatthe evolution of a prehensile tail in some New Worldmonkeys has prevented “real [evolutionary] progress.”

In the 1971 The Antecedents of Man, the influentialanatomist Wilford Clark advocates both the arborealtheory and the inclusion of treeshrews within the pri-mates; these two topics are intimately related withinClark’s framework of primate evolution. He portraysthe origin of the primates in the form of arboreal mam-mals similar to treeshrews during the late Cretaceous orPaleocene. Reflecting earlier arguments by Elliot Smithand Wood Jones, Clark develops the argument that pri-mates are distinguished by increased complexity of gen-eral organization, especially in the brain, rather than theelaboration of specializations. The latter was the route

taken by more terrestrial mammalian orders in contrastto primates. Clark views primitive insectivores as tree-climbing animals with claws, nonprehensile hands andfeet, small eyes and brains, and a well-developed olfac-tory apparatus. The hindlimbs and (especially) theforelimbs of primares preserve an ancient simplicity ofstructure and function, although the ability to cling andgrasp has been increased by a wider range of movementpossible at the shoulder, greater rotatory movementsbetween the radius and ulna, a flexible ankle joint,increased mobility of the digits, and development ofdigital friction pads. Orbital convergence is consideredto be advantageous in the arboreal milieu because itproduces overlap of the two visual fields and thereforestereoscopic estimation of distance. Clark also points tothe incomplete decussation of optic nerve fivers at theoptic chiasm as important in primate stereoscopicvision. He differs from Wood Jones because the latterconsiders orbital convergence to be a secondary resultof snout reduction rather than a feature that would bedirectly subject to selection. Emphasis on the selectiveadvantage of orbital convergence was consistent withthe reconstruction of early primate genera, such asHemiacodon, Adapis, Notharctus and Nannopithex asvertical clingers and leapers and the conclusion thatVCL was the dominant locomotor type in Eocene toOligocene “prosimians” by John Napier and AlanWalker in the 1970s. Clark relates the evolution of flatnails to increased functional importance of terminalfriction pads and believes that pads are more efficeintfor grasping than are claws.

Visual Predation Hypothesis:A Challenge to the Theory

A major challenge to the arboreal theory is the visualpredation hypothesis, explicated in the doctoral disser-tation and series of papers by Matt Cartmill. Cartmilldevelops the hypothesis by comparing extant arborealmammals with regard to limb morphology and loco-motion, orbital convergence, and olfactory regres-sion. He believes that it is unclear that primate-likemorphology is the most advantageous to arboreallife and may be disadvantageous in certain contexts.He argues, for example, that the degree of orbitalconvergence manifested in certain primates decreasesparallax and would not be valuable in leaping betweenbranches; the slow-climbing, insectivorous slenderloris and slow loris actually have more closely approx-imated orbits than the leaping galagos.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


FOREST-FLOORPREDATORS

Monodelphis RhynchocyonUrogaleViverraHerpestesFelisBassariscus(astutus)etc.

LOWER-CANOPY-AND-GROUND HERBIVORES

TrichosurusLemur cattaCallicebusCebusetc.

CANOPYHERBIVORES

PhascolarctosPseudocheirusRatufaPotosIndriAtelesCercopithecusetc.

CANOPYINSECTIVORES

PtilecercusGalago elegantulusPerodicticusetc.

DaubentoniaDactylopsilaDactylonax

Rhinosciurus

Leontideus

DidelphisTupaia spp.

ParadoxurusNandiniaArctictis

VERTICALLYRANGING

HERBIVORES

SciurusCallosciurusetc.

Nasua

GROUNDSQUIRRELS

TamiasDremomysetc.

MARMOSETS

Cheirogaleus

SHRUB-LAYERINSECTIVORES

MarmosaCercartetusMicrocebusLorisGalago spp.Tarsiusetc.

Figure 3 Cartmill excluded taxa such as flying lemurs, bats, and sloths from his analysis. He recognized eight categories in his compar-

isons of primate adaptations with those of other mammals. The category that contains Daubentonia is termed “woodpecker avatars.”

Cartmill then discussed grasping extremities, orbital convergence, and olfactory regression. He concluded that primate-like morphology

is not necessarily superior in the arboreal context; instead, primate-like morphology is adapted to nocturnal, visually-directed predation

on insects in terminal branches

Source: Adapted from Matt Cartmill (1972), Fig. 4-1. Copyright © 1972 by Aldine Publishers. Reprinted by permission of AldineTransaction, a division ofTransaction Publishers.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Cartmill observes that we find primate-like charac-ter states in marsupial taxa that hunt and manuallycapture insects among slender branches. He advo-cates a primate common ancestor that resembledthe extant marsupial “dormouse” possum, mountainpygmy possum, and mouse opposum foraging inforest understory. Major components of his modelare the deductions that the prehensile hindfoot isthe only shared locomotor specialization in primatesand the functional differentiation of the fore- andhindlimbs in arboreal mammals often works in theopposite direction than that postulated by WoodJones. Cartmill then argues that prehensile ability inthe hindfoot allows well-controlled and judiciousmovements on slender branches during hunting.

Visual convergence and correlated neurological spe-cializations are predatory adaptations and are similarto adaptations seen in felids and owls, allowing thepredators to gauge distance to the prey without mov-ing their heads. Cartmill considers claws to be a hin-drance to a bush animal that grasps thin supports byopposition of preaxial and postaxial digits and infre-quently climbs on larger surfaces. Simplification of theolfactory apparatus is the result of the approximationof the medial walls of the two orbits; this conclusionis more similar to that of Elliot Smith and WoodJones than it is to that of Clark. He states that otherlineages of visually oriented predators have acquiredcomparable visual field overlap without significantolfactory reduction.

A

B

C

D

E

F

H

G

Figure 4 Cartmill’s comparison of orbital orientation in the American opossum (A), treeshrew and squirrel (B), “prosimian” (C), and

“anthropoid” (D). Drawing E represents a mammal with moderate frontation and approximation of periorbital cones to demonstrate an

inverse relationship between relative eyeball size and convergence. Drawings F (for example, Nycticebus), G (Lepilemur), and H (G. sene-

galensis) compare degrees of convergence and frontation in a discussion of allometric influence on frontation

Source: Adapted from Matt Cartmill (1972), Fig. 4-2. Copyright © 1972 by Aldine Publishers. Reprinted by permission of AldineTransaction, a division ofTransaction Publishers.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM


Both the classic arboreal hypothesis and the visualpredation hypothesis examine two basic ideas: that“arboreality” is the niche of early primates and that pri-mate morphology is the best morphology for an arbo-real mammal—ideally and uniquely suiting primatesfor arboreal existence. Elliot Smith and Wood Jonesconclude that these statements are true, but Cartmilldetermines that primate morphology is not the bestmorphology for an arboreal mammal and thereforeseeks to present an alternative explanation for the suiteof primate features. Both schools appear to show a lim-ited concept of niche. As G. Evelyn Hutchinson arguedin 1958, the niche of an organism is multidimensional.A single tree presents a number of niches for animalsdepending on factors such as their body size, mobility,and dietary requirements. There is, therefore, no singlearboreal niche, and different morphologies may beequally successful in the arboreal milieu and reflect dif-ferent specific niches. In this context, the visual preda-tion hypothesis may be considered a modification ofthe classic arboreal theory rather than a completely dis-tinct paradigm. Martin has asserted that a more inclu-sive answer for primate adaptations is the occupation ofa fine-branch niche by small- to medium-bodied, noc-turnal, and actively foraging early primates. RobertSussman also advocates a terminal branch setting forearly primates in his mixed diet theory: well developedvisual acuity and color vision and grasping feet andhands would be favorable adaptations for primates for-aging in the terminal branches of the successful andactive radiation of angiosperms.

An unanswered question is whether ancestralprimates and other fine-branch niche mammals(particularly, the ancestors of marsupial taxa discussedby Cartmill) converged in their locomotor adaptationsor whether the niche was occupied by their commonJurassic ancestor. Cartmill concludes that there is noevidence that primate-like adaptations were present inTriassic mammalian ancestors. Southern Africa hasproduced a complete skeleton of the late TriassicMegazostrodon, which is interpreted as shrew-like inhabits and with a grasping hindlimb. The morganu-codonts may have been able to move on both theground and in trees. While the Cretaceous placentalZalamdolestes is long-snouted and lacks the postorbitalbar found in undoubted primates, its postcrania indi-cate that it was a specialized jumping mammal.

Many of the fossil undoubted primates that had ear-lier been identified as vertical clingers and leapers havemore recently been reconstructed as quadrupedal (for

example, subfamily Adapinae): Although quadrupedalprimates often leap between branches, there is not theemphasis on recurrent leaping that would be found indedicated VCL forms. Selection for leaping ability perse would not figure as prominently in the interpreta-tion of morphological characters.

An important question is whether ancestral pri-mates and other fine-branch mammals (particularly,the ancestors of marsupial taxa discussed by Cartmill)converged in their locomotor adaptations or whetherthe niche was occupied by their common Jurassicancestor. Cartmill concludes that there is no evidencethat primate-like adaptations were present in Triassicmammalian ancestors. South Africa has produced acomplete skeleton of the late Triassic Megazostrodon,interpreted as shrew-like in habits and with a graspinghindlimb. The recent description by Qiang Ji and col-leagues of Eomaia scansoria is that of a 125-million-year-old eutherian adapted for climbing. As JohnWible and his collaborators point out, Cretaceouseutherians have usually been reconstructed as planti-grade, terrestrial, or scansorial quadrupeds. Based onfeatures of the hands, feet, scapula, wrist, vertebral col-umn, and claws, we view eomaia as capable of graspingand branch walking. Ji and colleagues conclude thatEomaia was scansorial (similar to tree shrew Tupaia) orfully arboreal (similar to tree shrew Ptilocercus), thatmost basal metatherians were scansorial, and thatscansorial skeletal factors are primitive for the earliestknown eutherians. There is data that primitive marsu-pials were also climbers. Homoplasy is a persistentproblem; for example, there is evidence that thePaleocene multituberculate Ptilodus may have beenarboreal with a prehensile tail, but the status of multi-tuberculates as Mesozoic mammals is controversial,and Ji and colleagues maintain convergent evolution inthe postcrania of early mammals.

— Paul F. Whitehead

Further Readings

Cartmill, M. (1972). Arboreal adaptations and theorigin of the order primates. In R. Tuttle (Ed.),Functional and evolutionary biology of primates,pp. 97–122. Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.

Cartmill, M. (1974). Rethinking primate origins.Science, 184, 436–443.

Cartmill, M. (1974). Pads and claws in arboreallocomotion. In F. A. Jenkins (Ed.), Primatelocomotion, pp. 45–83. New York: Academic Press.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY236

Clark, W. E. L. G. (1971). The antecedents of man,3rd edition. Chicago: Quadrangle Books.

Jones, F. W. (1918). Arboreal man. London: Arnold.Jones, F. W. (1929). Man’s place among the mammals.

London: Arnold.Martin, R. D. (1990). Primate origins and evolution:

A phylogenetic reconstruction. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.

Smith, G. E. (1924). Evolution of man: Essays. London:Milford.

Sussman, R. (1991). Primate origins and theevolution of angiosperms. Journal of Primatology,23, 209–223.

4 ARCHAEOLOGY

Archaeology is one of the four subdisciplines ofanthropology and is the scientific study of pasthuman culture through ancient material remains.Detailed analyses of these material remains helparchaeologists reconstruct and interpret the lifeways ofancient groups. Research themes relating to regionalsettlement patterns, the evolution of agriculture, thespatial arrangement of large city-states, and the col-lapse of large empires are often pursued alongsidemore regionally oriented questions, such as groupmigration and interaction patterns within a specificvalley corridor.

What Is Archaeology, andWhat Do Archaeologists Study?

Archaeologists are anthropologists who study thematerial objects, or artifacts, left by past humangroups. Artifacts are the tangible portions of cultureleft by past populations. Examples of artifacts includebut are not limited to ancient tools (projectile points,pottery fragments, stone knives, scrapers, bone awls,and fish hooks); food remains and food-processingequipment (animal bones, carbonized seeds, grindingstones, pestles); personal artifacts (buttons, buckles,coins, jewelry, clothing fragments, bone combs); archi-tectural debris (nails, mortar, window glass, bricks,foundation remains); as well as objects used for leisureactivities (gaming pieces, clay and stone smoking pipefragments, musical instruments, writing utensils).

In addition to artifacts, archaeologists studythe organic residues, or features, left by past groups.Unlike artifacts, features cannot be removed whole,but are often destroyed during excavation. For thisreason, archaeologists keep detailed notes, drawings,and photographs during the excavation of features.Soil samples, designed to recover ancient plantremains, microfossils, pollen, and phytoliths, arealso often collected from features. Features includethe remains of prehistoric hearths, postmolds fromancient structures, midden debris from garbagedumps, privies, as well as artifact concentrations fromwork and resource-processing areas.

Artifacts and features are commonly found at sites.Sites are locations containing evidence of human activ-ity. Sites range in size from small resource-processingstations measuring a few meters in diameter, to moreelaborate residential sites measuring an acre in size, tolarge multifamily complexes, which cover dozens ofacres. The features of these sites vary with the amountof activity and complexity of the culture group. Byexample, the complexity of Copan, a large Mayancommunity, contained an extensive grouping of tem-ples, residences, and specialized procurement stationsmany acres in size. By comparison, the settlementpatterns of the seasonally occupied Schoharie CreekII camp in the Schoharie Valley of eastern New Yorkcovered less than a fifth of an acre in size and pro-duced evidence of less than a dozen features. None ofthese features were elaborate building remains, butrather consisted of the residues of small-hearth, mid-den, and postmold features.

The Development of ArchaeologicalTheory and Methodology

The history of archaeology dates back centuriesand can’t be accurately pinpointed to a single event orpoint in time. Many archaeologists attribute someof the earliest archaeological writings to what hasbecome known as the “Speculative” or “Antiquarian”period dating between 1400 and 1860. This period islargely characterized by local inquiries about thehuman past. Interest in the past was characterizedby an attempt to explain local “finds” and regional dif-ferences, often through the natural sciences. Studiescentering on the ancient inhabitants of Greece andRome were popular along with studies designed toconfirm the events depicted in the Bible. Discoveriesduring this period would set the stage for future

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY 237

scientific studies at the end ofthe 19th century.

Included among theseinquiries was Thomas Jefferson’sexcavation of an ancient burialmound near his residence inVirginia. Of particular impor-tance was the meticulous recordkeeping of the various soillayers employed by Jefferson.Jefferson’s methodology differsfrom other 18th-century schol-ars who merely removed arti-facts without consideration toits provenience or context. Forthis reason, many archaeologistsconsider this to be one of the ear-liest professional excavations.

Charles Lyell’s Principles ofGeology was published in 1830 and immediately had aprofound impact on archaeology. Lyell’s work under-scored the importance of stratigraphy and the factthat the same geological processes that were in exis-tence in the past can still be found in present times.This was a departure from previous theories, such ascatastrophism, which argued that major catastrophes,such as floods, wiped out past populations and ani-mal species, giving rise to extant species.

During the first quarter of the 19th century,Danish archaeologists C. J. Thomsen and Jan Worsaaeconstructed a three-age system to explain artifactvariation observed in the archaeological collectionsof the Danish National Museum. The system wascharacterized by three successive cultural periods,known as the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the IronAge. Specific tool types, behaviors, and technologicalinnovations that coincided with a chronologicalperiod of development characterized each period. InNorth America and Europe, similar evolutionarysequences would be developed to explain local varia-tions in artifacts and would become an importantpart of archaeological research.

Other important volumes, including CharlesDarwin’s discussion of evolution in On the Originof Species and Alexander von Humbolt’s survey ofindigenous populations in Views of the Mountains andMonuments of the Indigenous People of America, werealso written during this period. Both publicationsattempted to incorporate the natural sciences whenexplaining past cultural changes.

Archaeology was developing into a scientific fielddevoted to the study of the past by the mid-19th cen-tury. From approximately 1860 to 1920, archaeolo-gists working in the United States and Europe wereconcerned with the development of trait lists thatcould be used to describe the important characteris-tics of an archaeological culture. Traits lists includedthe culture group’s tools, marriage patterns, politicaland economic systems, food gathering, and writingsystems. The ultimate goal of the construction ofthese trait lists was to develop a scheme of evolutionthat could be used to compare and determine thecultural complexity of past groups.

Lewis Henry Morgan’s study of the Iroquoisof New York is an example of this approach. In TheLeague of the Iroquois, Morgan outlined the culturaltraits of this group, describing their tools, ceremonies,political organization, and lineage. This informationwas used to place the society within a unilinearscheme of evolution. Under this scheme, the presenceor absence of certain characteristics, such as certaintypes of tools and the society’s ability to participate incertain types of food procurement tasks, formed thebasis for its placement. Under this scheme, all culturesprocessed along the same sequence of evolutionarystages, with some groups being more advanced thanothers. Unilineal evolution characterized much ofthe archaeological work of the late 19th and early20th centuries. Unilineal evolution would influenceneoevolutionary anthropological and archaeologicaltheory of the late 20th century.

Source: © Christine B. Rieth.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY238

The trait lists developed by early archaeologists alsohelped to formulate new classificatory schemes basedon the similarities between artifacts and their rela-tionships to the larger environment. William FlindersPetrie’s seriation (or ordering) of pottery in Egyptduring the last two decades of the 19th century is oneexample of how the careful analysis of the attributes ofartifacts was used by archaeologists to study changesin tool manufacture over time. Later seriations ofpottery and lithic tools would become importantforms of relative dating within archaeology.

In addition to trait lists, the range of archaeologicalcultures studied continued to be diverse. Excavationsby Heinrich Schliemann in search of Homer’s Troy,Frederick Ward Putnam’s excavations at Great SerpentMound in Ohio, Alfred Kidder’s excavations at thePecos site in New Mexico, Hiram Bingham’s excava-tions at Machu Picchu in Peru, Manuel Gamio’s exca-vations in the Basin of Mexico, and Theodore Bent’sexcavations at Great Zimbabwe in the Far East areamong the projects carried out during this period.

By the end of the period, Americanist archaeologywas beginning to shift away from an evolutionaryviewpoint toward one centered on cultural relativism.As introduced by Franz Boas, cultural relativismproposed that individual cultures should be studiedin their own terms with limited comparison to othersocieties. Boas proposed that the behavioral practicesand material culture of existing societies should beextensively documented before they disappeared.

Only after all facets of thesociety were documentedcould meaningful comparisonsbe constructed. Such ideaswould influence archaeologyduring the first half of the20th century.

Between 1920 and 1960,archaeologists were primarilyconcerned with creating his-torical relationships betweenculture groups. The creation ofsuch relationships, commonlyreferred to as the “direct histor-ical approach,” assumes thatsimilar traits found betweengroups living in a particulararea can be traced back intime to reveal interrelation-

ships between archaeologicalcultures. In some instances, a common ancestrybetween groups was also proposed.

Important advances in field and artifact analysistechniques were implemented during the 20th cen-tury. Included among these techniques was the intro-duction of dendrochronology and radiocarbon datingwithin archaeology. The use of dendrochronology todate archaeological sites was first introduced duringthe early 20th century, providing the first chrono-metric dates for the past. The technique was devel-oped by A. E. Douglas, and uses tree rings to datecarbonized and noncarbonized wood to calendaryears. In the American Southwest, where woodpreservation is good, this technique has been widelyused to date sites several thousand years in age. Inother areas, such as the Northeastern United Statesand northern Europe, where wood preservation ispoor, tree ring sequences have been developed forshorter periods of time.

William Libby first introduced radiocarbon (C 14)dating as a technique for determining the chronomet-ric occupation of sites in 1949. Radiocarbon datingmeasures the amount or rate of decay of the radio-active element carbon. The technique had a profoundeffect on the field of archaeology and provided impor-tant chronological information about the humanpast. Other absolute dating techniques, includingpotassium-argon, thermoluminescence, and obsidianhydration dating, soon followed and were integratedinto archaeometric analyses.


A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY

Advances in archaeological field techniques werealso developed during this period. Included amongthese techniques were new developments in field surveyand recording. Among the most important techniqueswas the Wheeler-Kenyon method. The Wheeler-Kenyon method, named after archaeologists MortimerWheeler and Kathleen Kenyon, was a field techniquewhereby large excavation areas were divided intosmaller units separated by unexcavated balks, whichremained as control samples. Within these smallerunits, archaeologists removed soils along cultural andstratigraphic layers with careful recording of theexposed soils occurring. This technique was widelyadopted and is commonly used today.

Finally, any discussion of this period would not becomplete without mentioning two important archae-ological discoveries. Howard Carter excavated thetomb of Tutankhamen in Egypt between 1922 and1923. In addition to the mummified remains of theking, excavation of the burial chamber producedspectacular goods, including gilded chariots, statues,decorated jars, food remains, ornaments, and per-sonal items needed in the afterworld. Excavationsconducted by Leonard Woolley at the royal tombsof Ur in 1926 produced equally impressive goods,including a wooden lyre, inscribed tablets, and rem-nants of woven mat that lined the burial chamber.As a result of these excavations, public attention wasfocused on archaeology and the spectacular artifactcollections housed in museums.

Archaeology was developing into a highly scientificdiscipline, which made use of techniques employed inthe natural sciences by the 1960s. Coinciding withthis change was an attitude away from the direct his-torical approach toward a new type of archaeologyfocused on reconstructing human behavior and thecultural processes that guided these behaviors. Led byLewis Binford, the “New” or “Processual Archaeology”stressed the use of scientific methods to understandpast cultural processes. As a result, multiyear projectsrelated to the settlement and subsistence patterns oflarger regions were undertaken in areas such as theBasin of Mexico, the Northeastern United States, andthe American Southwest.

Federal legislation was enacted to protect archaeo-logical sites threatened by public construction projectsin the 1970s. The result was the development of cul-tural resource management (CRM) as an importantvenue for archaeological research and advancementwithin the discipline. Also known as salvage or contract

archaeology, CRM involves “research, conservation,and management of cultural resources within a regu-latory framework.” CRM archaeology currentlyemploys nearly half of the archaeologists working inthe United States, and each year hundreds of millionsof dollars are set aside for the excavation and interpre-tation of archaeological sites, which cannot beavoided, as a result of state and federally funded con-struction projects.

Postprocessual archaeology became a leading schoolof thought during the 1980s. Often associated withBritish archaeologist Ian Hodder, postprocessualistsargue that the scientific study of the past omitsimportant ideological tenants of the human decision-making process by focusing too heavily on the processesthat are inherent in the environment. Furthermore,it dismisses individual choice in the creation of thepast, focusing solely on the evolutionary processes ofthe group.

Today, archaeology is a very specialized discipline,with the analysis of archaeological materials oftenbeing completed by specialists in such varied disci-plines as archaeometric, lithic, ceramic, ethnobotani-cal, faunal, phytolith, and pollen analysis. In additionto a particular research specialty, most archaeologistsalso specialize in a particular culture area and/or timeperiod, creating individual experts in such varied top-ics as Early Iroquoian settlement, Roman pottery, orMayan Post-Classic subsistence.

Archaeological Methods

The methods used by archaeologists are highly spe-cialized and are dependant upon the project’s researchdesign. A research design is most simply described asa research plan that is used to guide a field excava-tion. Research designs generally follow the scientificmethod, with research hypotheses being formulated atthe onset of the project. The hypothesis is then testedthrough archaeological or ethnographic fieldwork andis confirmed, rejected, or refined based on the col-lected data. Most research designs contain the follow-ing items: list of research questions/hypothesis beingaddressed; the specific methods used to identify andexcavate the site; the lab techniques that will beemployed to process, conserve, and interpret the site’sremains; and information about the long-term cura-tion, or storage, of the generated materials.

The primary goal of the research design is to iden-tify a research question or hypothesis that will be

239

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY240

investigated as part of the project. Research questionsare not haphazardly generated, but result from back-ground research on the prehistory and history of thearea, the local environmental and topographic condi-tions, the sensitivity for artifacts and materials to bepreserved after centuries of land use, as well as previ-ous studies on the archaeology of the area. Researchquestions can be as complex as investigating the set-tlement systems of a specific valley to somethingmore specific such as defining the date for the earliestappearance of a particular group at a particular site.

Once a research question is formulated, it isimportant that the archaeologist learn as much aboutthe project area as possible through backgroundresearch. Often this will include consulting specialistsin other disciplines, such as geology to learn aboutthe soils of the region or with botanists to learn aboutthe plant life of the region. In addition, historic mapsand other documents should be consulted to assesschanges in landscape use, hydrology, and ecology inthe area. This information is important and will helpthe researcher when interpreting the collected data.

One of the primary activities of the archaeologist isto identify and sample archaeological sites. Identifyingarchaeological sites is a complex process that is basedas much on experience as technique. The most com-mon means of finding archaeological sites is by iden-tifying patterns of artifacts or cultural materials onthe ground surface. Often, these isolated finds pro-vide clues to the range and type of materials that arelocated below the ground surface. In other instances,historic maps, deed records, photographs, and oralhistories also provide clues to the location of build-ing foundations, privies, and wells. Other noninvasivetechniques, including aerial photography, remotesensing, and ground-penetrating radar, have alsobeen employed to locate larger features, such as buri-als, mounds, and fortifications, associated with sites.Notes, photographs, and maps showing the spatialdistribution of the artifacts are usually created andkept as an initial record of the site.

Once a site has been identified, intrusive methodsare employed to examine the site. Excavation is adestructive technique that displaces the remains ofhuman activity destroying the spatial arrangement ofartifacts in relationship to each other. Once the site isexcavated, it can never been replaced or returned toits original state. For this reason, excavation shouldbe completed only under the supervision of a trainedarchaeologist. Notes about each phase of the excavation

should be kept so that data about the provenience (orthree-dimensional placement of the artifact) of eachobject can be determined in relationship to other sitematerials.

Before excavating, archaeologists establish a gridsystem that is tied into a fixed point, or datum, on thelandscape. Within the grid system, smaller excavationunits, consisting of meterwide squares or rectangulartrenches, are designated. The grid system is used torecord the horizontal and vertical provenience of eachartifact, feature, and excavation unit identified at thesite. Since excavation destroys the site, the grid systemprovides another means of recording the context inwhich materials are found. After the excavation isover, the locations of artifact recovery can be enteredinto a computer so that a base map of the site can begenerated.

Archaeological excavation can occur in manyforms, including vertical excavation, horizontal exca-vation, or a combination thereof. Vertical excavationconsists of uncovering a limited portion of a site sothat detailed chronological sequences and successivestratigraphic layers can be exposed. This is in contrastto horizontal excavations, which are designed toexpose a limited number of stratigraphic layers acrossa much wider area of the site. Unlike vertical excava-tions, horizontal excavations are less concerned withexposing deep stratigraphic sequences. Most archae-ologists use a combination of these two excavationstrategies depending upon the tested hypothesis andthe collection needs of the project.

Dirt and artifacts are carefully removed from excava-tion units using shovels and trowels. Each stratigraphiclayer is removed separately, and the artifacts recoveredfrom each cultural layer are screened through meshhardware cloth to separate the dirt from the artifacts.The artifacts recovered from each excavation unit andstratigraphic levels are bagged separately. Photographsand plan and profile drawings of important artifactsand features are often made before removal. Once theartifacts are removed, they are returned to the labora-tory for cleaning and analysis.

In addition to artifacts, flotation and soil samplesmay be collected to recover microplant and fossilspecimens that might help interpret the site. Flotationis a specialized screening technique that is used toseparate organic and inorganic materials. Organicmaterials, such as seeds, roots, wood charcoal, animalbone, and fish scales, will float and are collectedseparately for identification. Inorganic materials,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:16 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY 241

such as lithic projectile points, ceramicvessel shards, fire-cracked rock, heavierbone, and shell will settle to the bottomof the screen, where they can be collected.Flotation is most commonly used to collectvery small artifacts that might otherwise belost during normal screening.

Once the excavation is completed, therecovered artifacts and field data are takento a laboratory to be washed, catalogued,analyzed, and rebagged for storage. Theconducted analyses are dependent uponthe research hypotheses being tested.However, most studies start by classifyingartifacts by material type, age, decorativeattributes, and/or function. Comparisonswith regional typological sequences arealso conducted to determine how the arti-facts fit within larger regional sequences.

Specialized analyses such as radiocar-bon dating, ceramic residue analysis, traceelement analysis, or lithic use-wear analysismay also be conducted on a sample of arti-facts. Specialized analyses often providemore detailed information about howthe artifact was used, under what condi-tions, and how it was manufactured. Sincefew labs are equipped to complete suchanalyses, specialists are often hired to ana-lyze objects. Specialists become part of theresearch team, and their analyses are con-sidered when verifying or rejecting theresearch hypothesis.

Finally, conservation treatments may beapplied to fragile artifacts before they are packedfor storage. Often, conservation treatments prolongthe life of the artifact, preserving it for use by futureresearchers. For example, fragile textiles if not prop-erly dried and preserved may rapidly deteriorate onceremoved from the soil matrix. Insect damage andother types of fungal inclusions may also contributeto the artifact’s deterioration. Extensive deteriorationundoubtedly limits the research value of the piece andlimits the amount of information that can be recov-ered about its past use.

Some conservation treatments, including the refit-ting of ceramic artifacts and the treatment of corro-sion, may also enhance the artifact’s research value andreveal important clues about its past use. For example,conservation of the corroding 1812 Confiance anchor

from Lake Champlain in upstate New York revealeddetailed maker’s marks and original paint alongthe upper portion of the shank. These clues wereimportant, allowing archaeologists to determine theobject’s origin and date of manufacturer of the largershipwreck.

Once the archaeological site has been excavatedand the artifacts have been analyzed, archaeologistsare ready to interpret the site. This phase of theproject is designed to pull together all of the informa-tion collected during the project so that the researchhypothesis can be confirmed or rejected. Often, thedata are entered into elaborate database and statisticalprograms so that significance of hypotheses and rela-tionships between artifacts can be confirmed. Forlarger, regional projects, data manipulation using


A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY242

geographic information systems (GIS) and CADDtechnology may be employed. GIS and CADD pro-grams have become an important component inmodern archaeological research, since they allow thesite to be viewed as a three-dimensional plot, makingcomparisons of individual stratigraphic layers possi-ble across a large site.

Archaeological sites are generally interpretedagainst existing cultural models and explanatoryframeworks. Archaeological models are subject tochange as new data are introduced and we refine ourunderstanding of past cultural behavioral processes.Throughout the history of archaeology, theoreticalframeworks related to historical particularism, cul-tural ecology, structural functionism, unilinear andmultilinear evolution, and cognitive archaeology haveall been employed to interpret archaeological remains.

Once the archaeologist interprets the site, theresults are generally written up either as a researchreport or other peer review publication. Since archae-ology is a destructive science, the field and laboratoryrecords along with the artifacts are often the onlyremaining evidence of the site. Publication and dis-semination of research results to a professional andnonprofessional audience is considered an obligationof the archaeologist, since public funds are directedtoward many archaeology projects. In fact, in somecultural resource management projects, a commitmentto produce a research report or product revealingthe results to the public is written into the project’scontract.

While most excavations result in a detailed excava-tion report complete with details about soil strata,excavation methodology, and raw counts of artifacts,many of these reports are not widely distributed andare largely relegated to the “gray literature” used byother professional archaeologists. Popular articleswritten for regional journals and national sciencemagazines are also generated as brief summaries ofresearch results. These publications are much moreappealing to the public since they are free of the tech-nical jargon and detailed information contained inthe more extensive site report.

Archaeology in the 21st Century

In the 21st century, archaeologists have and will con-tinue to face new challenges when reconstructing thepast. Included among these challenges are the involve-ment of Native American groups in reconstructing

their own past history, the increasing destruction ofsites at the hands of human and nonhuman factors,and the increasing importance of heritage tourism inpromoting the historic resources of a region.

One of the major issues facing American archaeol-ogists in the 21st century involves the relationshipbetween archaeologists and Native Americans overownership of the past. At the heart of this issue isthe debate over the curation of human remainsand funerary objects recovered from archaeologicalsites. The Native American Graves Protection andRepatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 has activelysought to involve Native Americans in the protection,interpretation, and curation of sacred or funeraryobjects. Under NAGPRA, archaeological materialsfrom mortuary contexts are subject to return andreburial if they can be culturally affiliated with aknown tribe.

Many archaeologists argue that NAGPRA is notbeneficial to archaeology, stating that human remainsshould be preserved and studied to inform us aboutthe effects of cultural and environmental factors onpast human societies. They also argue that if theseremains are turned over to Native Americans, access tothese remains will be controlled by a few who may nothave legitimate ownership over these objects. NativeAmericans argue that these remains are the descen-dents of ancestors who resided in North America priorto the arrival of Europeans. NAGPRA is a means of“righting” centuries of wrongful behavior leviedagainst Native Americans following the colonization ofthe New World. In addition, they argue that they knoweverything there is to know about their past and donot need to know more through archaeology. Thesedifferences invoke spirited exchanges between anthro-pologists and Native Americans, often resulting inmultiyear court cases over the ownership of remains.

Other activities on the part of state and federalgovernments have also sought to give indigenousgroups a role in reconstructing their own heritage.Under the National Historic Preservation Act,acknowledgment of the significance of TraditionalCultural Places (TCPs) has given Native groups animportant voice in defining the significance of cul-tural places and their preservation in relation to thegroup’s cultural beliefs. The establishment of TribalHistoric Preservation Offices (THPOs) to overseeSection 106 compliance on federally funded projectshas also allowed Native Americans to have inputthrough review and comment on projects that may

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY 243

affect cultural resourceson reservations or withintribal territories.

Destruction of archaeo-logical sites in the faceof human and nonhumanagents will continue toplague archaeology in the21st century. Commonthreats to the preservationof sites include damage bydevelopment projects, agri-cultural damage, and loot-ing. The increasing rateof development in NorthAmerica and Europe hasresulted in the destructionof hundreds of archaeo-logical sites at the handsof developers. The UnitedStates government enactedSection 106 of the NationalHistoric Preservation Act to protect archaeologicalsites discovered on federally funded projects and onfederally owned lands. This legislation requires devel-opers and federal land managers to take into con-sideration the impacts of a construction project oncultural resources within the project area. In instanceswhere archaeological sites are identified, the agency,in coordination with the developer, is responsible foreither avoiding the site through project redesign ormitigating the adverse effects to the site througharchaeological investigation.

Cultural resource management studies, designedto mitigate the adverse effects of these projects, havemade significant contributions to our understandingof the past by increasing our knowledge about sitesthat may not have been considered as a result of acad-emic projects. There are unfortunately few laws andregulations designed to protect archaeological resourcesencountered through state and privately fundedprojects. In the future, cooperation between archaeol-ogists and developers is needed to ensure that culturalresources are protected and preserved for futuregenerations.

Natural and cultural factors associated with dailyfarming activities also pose threats to archaeologicalsite preservation. Repeated plowing often impacts anddisperses cultural remains across a wide area. Deepmechanical plowing can damage delicate artifacts and

destroy intact cultural deposits that may be critical tosite interpretation. As discussed below, plowing alsooften brings artifacts to the surface, where they areexposed to collectors eager to enhance existing collec-tions. Other natural factors, including forest clearingand erosion, often expose buried remains, makingthem susceptible to looting and destruction throughenvironmental conditions.

Destruction of archaeological sites as a result oflooting and the antiquities trade continues to plaguearchaeology. The recovery of artifacts using metaldetectors and other techniques, such as probing,result in the destruction of archaeological materialsand destruction of the archaeological proveniencefrom which the artifact was recovered. The intent oflooters, to recover objects that could be resold onlineand in private auction houses, often results in impor-tant collections being disassembled and scatteredacross many different institutions, quite often withlittle provenience information attached.

Although many states have laws preventing therecovery of archaeological remains on state-ownedland without written permission, looters often considerhistoric sites such as battlefields, historic farmsteads,military sites, and submerged shipwrecks as veritabletreasure chests for recovering artifacts. Attempts tostop looting on these sites vary by agency and state,with enforcement being difficult when looters often

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY AND GENDER STUDIES244

work in teams equipped with two-way radios andother gear used to signal approaching land managers.Federal and state governments have sought to prose-cute looters in extreme cases; however, many lootersare never caught, making careers out of destroyingarchaeological sites.

Recent interest in heritage tourism has helped tofuel the public’s interest in archaeology. The NationalTrust for Historic Preservation defines heritagetourism as “traveling to experience the places, arti-facts and activities that authentically represent thestories and people of the past and present.” In manycountries, including the United States, Canada, andGreat Britain, heritage tourism is an important meansof strengthening indigenous cultural identity andgenerating revenue to support preservation projects.Without such funding, preservation of these sites isoften not possible. Venues such as St. Mary’s City,Crow Canyon Archaeological Center, and Jamestown,which allow the public to visit archaeological sitesand participate in excavations under the supervisionof professional archaeologists, also serve to educatethe public about our common cultural heritage. Onlywith public support can archaeologists hope to pre-serve the past for future generations.

— Christina B. Rieth

See also Binford, Lewis Roberts; Carter, Howard; DatingTechniques; Dendrochronology; Excavation; Fagan,Brian M.

Further Readings

Bahn, P. G. (1996). The Cambridge illustrated historyof archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Fagan, B. M. (1996). The Oxford companion toarchaeology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hargrove, C. M. (2002). Heritage tourism. CRM, 1,10–11.

Newman, T. W., & Sanford, R. M. (2001). Culturalresources archaeology: An introduction (U.S.Department of the Interior, National Park Service,Washington, DC). Walnut Creek, CA: Alta MiraPress.

Renfrew, C., & Bahn, P. (1991). Archaeology: Theories,methods, and practice. London: Thames & Hudson.

Ritchie, W. A. (1993). The archaeology of New YorkState. Garden City, NJ: Purple Mountain Press.

4 ARCHAEOLOGY AND GENDER STUDIES

Deconstructing Gender and Sex

Issues of gender presence and interrelations for thepast have increasingly been focused upon in the lasttwo decades in the English-speaking archaeologicalcommunity. Conkey and Spector are widely creditedwith the first paper to systematically examine theapplication of feminist approaches and insights toarchaeological practice and theory. Studies werepublished during the 1970s in Scandinavia, whichwent largely unnoticed due to the comparatively fewarchaeologists who understand the Nordic languages,exploring archaeological issues using an explicitlyfeminist perspective. In 1979, Norway hosted a work-shop discussing the androcentric element in archaeo-logical interpretation; however, the proceedingsremained unpublished until 1987, when they weredistributed in English. The proceedings have largelyremained uncited in the literature on the history ofgender archaeology, resulting in the incorrect attribu-tion of a late date for the inception of its beginnings.

Fundamental terminology such as theory, gender,and sex requires working definitions, and Hill hasidentified four core concepts that are being usedinconsistently:

1. The methods by which gender studies are incorpo-rated into investigative frameworks

2. The inappropriate, ahistorical usage of ethnographicanalogies with prehistoric data

3. An overemphasis upon one line of inquiry andverification

4. The conflation of gender studies with feministpoliticking

This is a consequence of gender archaeology’s fail-ure to produce significant alternative methodologicaladvances on issues like household organization, ide-ology, labor division, and production by comparisonwith traditional processual and postprocessualframeworks.

Hill defines theory as “a conceptual frameworkthat provides the foundation for explanation.” Withno inclusive, programmatic “feminist theory” havingbeen proposed and taken up as an investigativeframework for prehistoric archaeology, a focus point

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY AND GENDER STUDIES 245

has been feminist-inspired critiques of androcentrismwithin archaeology. The critiques of the explicit andimplicit androcentrism in existing archaeologicaltheoretical frameworks have contributed in particularto clarifying categories of gender and sex as organiz-ing principles.

It has been argued that gender is not geneticallyinherited, but a process of structuring subjectivities,whereas sex is biologically determinate and static.However, not all feminists and anthropologists con-cur with this strict separation. These philosophies,whereby sex is a social construct formed by discursivepractices, implicate Western biological anthropologyin denying that the same physical characteristics canbe used in a cross-cultural capacity to characterizesexual identity. This approach of sexual fluidity hasbeen undermined by the application of DNA analysisto skeletal remains.

Despite the conclusions drawn from molecularresults, it must be recognized that the investigationswere conceived and the DNA findings interpretedthrough a culturally mediated Western concept ofbiology. While a sex-gender divide remains useful, theunderlying construct is a distinction between Westernscientific views on anatomy and how biology and cul-ture interact from birth through concepts of appro-priate role plays, dress code, diet, and occupationalactivity. This can serve as a useful analytical tool, pro-vided it is recognized the division is not rigid.

Aside from the distinction made between anatomyand the cultural conceptualization of gender, genderstudies are concerned with analyzing both malesand females. Fieldwork has challenged the notion of adistinct male-female dichotomy, through expandingthe categories to include a third or fourth gender insome non-Western societies. Furthermore, ideologyof gender is also expressed through various objects,activities, and spatial arrangements in the landscape.Gender is therefore an important social variable,which must not be directly assumed, but rather isinterwoven with the social values of the society beingstudied.

Feminism and Gender Archaeology

Wylie has given three reasons why it has been claimedgender cannot be studied, namely, that women andgender are inaccessible in archaeological contexts, themethodology is too limited to sustain such research,and since identifying women and their activities is

inherently problematic, any reconstructions must bedrawn from enigmatic data. In rejecting these objec-tions, Wylie has stated that the sophisticated under-standing of gender during the third wave of feminismmade women and gender a possible object of studyin archaeology. This fails to account for historical dif-ferences in the development and impact of feminismin America and Europe. While there was a concern inAmerica with studying the sexual division of labor inhistorical and prehistoric contexts, gender archaeologyin Europe focused more on the symbolic and culturalmanifestations of gender. While this development hasbeen attributed to the greater impact of second-wavefeminism on American than European academia,Sørensen has noted that the existence of women hasalways been acknowledged; it is how their presence isunderstood that has changed.

Gender is socially constructed, with archaeologicalmanifestations varying spatially and temporally. Asthe social construct of sex class and the learned behav-ior of being masculine or feminine, activities, behav-iors, and role plays are expected of different gendergroups. Feminism has highlighted the composition ofarchaeology’s substantive body of knowledge anddemonstrated how gendered research is interwovenimplicitly into specific theoretical and practical con-structs. It shares in common with postprocessualismthe rejection of dispassionate objectivity and theseparateness of subject and object, favoring nuancedapproaches over categorical thinking. Spector hasdemonstrated how Western classificatory schemesimpose foreign values, distorting the original categoriesand biasing interpretation.

The task of recognizing the inherent bias anddeveloping a more gender-friendly discipline throughchallenging the status quo rests in integrating genderstudies into mainstream archaeological practice. Thedangers of adopting an androcentric approach havebeen highlighted through examining past and currentliterature on human origins, whereas a gynocentricapproach can lead to extremes such as exclusive MotherGoddess interpretations for the Upper Palaeolithic andNeolithic figurines in Europe, the Near East andNorth Africa. Parkington has highlighted aspects ofBushmen rights of passage portrayed in Western Caperock art. Such examples reflect both the advantageand disadvantages of a feminist approach.

Part of the process toward recognizing that genderarchaeology is not feminist archaeology is an under-standing that whereas feminism is inherently political

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, BIBLICAL246

with a focus on power relations, gender archaeologyconcerns social theory, which can be adapted by bothfeminist and nonfeminist frameworks: Gender isanother tool to further analyze the structuring princi-ples and practices of past cultures.

— Michael Brass

See also Gender; Sex Roles; Sexuality

Further Readings

Falk, D. (1997). Brain evolution in females: An answerto Mr. Lovejoy. In L. Hager (Ed.), Women inhuman evolution. London: Routledge, 114–136.

Gilchrist, R. (1999). Gender and archaeology:Contesting the past. London and New York:Routledge.

Hollimon, S. (1997). The third gender in nativeCalifornia: Two-spirit undertakers among theChumash and their neighbors. In C. Claassen &R. Joyce (Eds.), Women in prehistory: NorthAmerica and Mesoamerica (pp. 173–188).Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press,

Kent, S. (Ed.). (1998). Gender in African prehistory.Walnut Creek, CA: Alta Mira Press.

Nelson, S. (1997). Gender in archaeology: Analyzingpower and prestige. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta MiraPress.

Sørensen, M. (1998). Rescue and recovery: Onhistoriographies of female archaeologists. InM. Diaz-Andreu & M. Sørensen (Eds.), Excavatingwomen: A history of women in Europeanarchaeology (pp. 31–60). London: Routledge.

Sørensen, M. (2000). Gender archaeology. Cambridge:Polity Press.

Whitehouse, R. (Ed.). (1998). Introduction: Genderand Italian archaeology: Challenging the stereotypes.London: Accordia Research Centre and Institute ofArchaeology.

Zihlman, A. (1997). The Paleolithic glass ceiling:Women in human evolution. In L. Hager (Ed.),Women in human evolution (pp. 91–113). London:Routledge.

4 ARCHAEOLOGY, BIBLICAL

Biblical or Near Eastern archaeology reconstructs thehistories and societies of the Near East from humanancestors’ first migrations out of Africa 1.5 million

years ago to the end of the Ottoman Empire in 1918CE through archaeological evidence and historicaldocuments.

Geography and Climate

Although the archaic geographic term Near East hasbeen largely replaced by Middle East in popular andpolitical language, the Near East remains an operativeterm in archaeological research, alongside Anatolian,Arabian, Levantine, Mesopotamian, southwest Asia,and Syro-Palestinian. The geographic term Near Eastencompasses the modern countries of Bahrain, Cyprus,Jordan, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman,Palestine, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, UnitedArab Emirates, and Yemen.

Geography and climate play important roles inshaping Near Eastern life, dictating how and wherepopulations subsist as well as the daily and seasonalmeasure of time. The 6 million km area is an amalga-mation of mountains, plains, rivers, coasts, anddeserts that, together, create a dynamic setting for thecultural landscape. Primary mountain ranges beginin the Armenian region, with the Taurus and Ponticranges extending westward across Anatolia while theZagros and Elburz Ranges extend eastward into Iraqand Iran. Crossing the Straits of Hormuz, the HajarRange makes up a large portion of modern Oman.Running along either side of the Rift Valley’s exten-sion into the Middle East is a series of mountainranges: the Lebanon, Anti-Lebanon, and JabalAnsariye. Along the southern portion of this series isthe Hejaz Range, which extends to the tip of theArabian Peninsula. These features separate and some-times surround several plains and plateaus of varyingshapes and sizes, including the Anatolian and IranianPlateaus in the west and east, respectively. From northto south, the Zagros and Taurus Ranges give way tothe Mesopotamian Rise, the Syrian Steppe, UpperMesopotamia, and Lower Mesopotamia. There is asimilar condition in the Arabian Peninsula: movingwest to east from the Hijaz Range is the ArabianShield, followed by a series of escarpments, plateaus,and deserts until reaching the Persian Gulf.

Access to persistent water sources places a con-straint on Near Eastern society, determining the levelat which communities can thrive and subsist. Majorrivers such as the Nile, Tigris, and Euphrates andminor rivers such as the Orontes, Jordan, Balikh, andKhabur originate in higher elevations and travel

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, BIBLICAL 247

down to the plains, providing water for crops eitherthrough flooding or irrigation. Maritime transporta-tion is possible on the larger bodies of water, includ-ing the Eastern Mediterranean; the Black, Caspian,and Red Seas; and the Persian Gulf.

The region’s climate is characterized by extremeconditions and dictates, as does geography, the distri-bution of settlements and subsistence practices.The climate is a dry “continental” variant of theMediterranean climate with wet winters and hotsummers. The amount of moisture is often contin-gent on proximity to coastlines as well as altitude.Rainfall is higher and temperatures lower in thewinter months, when colder weather patterns fromEurasia move south and east. The intensity of rainfalland the duration of the rainy season generallydecrease from west to east and north to south. Annualrainfall on the Mediterranean Coastal Plain exceeds600 mm while further south and east, the semidesertzones see 350–600 mm, and the deserts, 0–150 mm.

Disciplinary Methods

Near Eastern archaeologists have traditionally con-centrated on the excavation of the region’s ancientsettlements that range in size from large urban cen-ters and villages to single family homes and tempo-rary encampments. Because natural resources in theregion are limited in their distribution, people habit-ually reoccupied the same location, using the buildingmaterials from previously abandoned settlements toconstruct new settlements. This palimpsest of humanoccupational activities resulted in deeply stratifiedartificial mounds easily visible across the region’slandscape and known in Arabic as tall, in Hebrew astell, in Persian as tal, and in Turkish as höyük.

Excavation methods of ancient Near Eastern settle-ments vary from region to region, but almost all rely onhorizontal and vertical stratigraphic relationships tounderstand a site’s multiple occupations. Archeologistsuse both absolute and relative dating techniques toassign dates to architectural and cultural phases.Examples of absolute dating techniques includeCarbon-14 and dendrochronology. Relative datingtechniques include the seriation of artifact assemblages,especially ceramic vessels, which permit the archaeolo-gist to date strata based on the artifacts they contain.

Landscape survey has played a critical role in the dis-cipline since its days when the early European explorersin the region first identified ancient settlements.

Today, survey is a commonplace practice in archaeo-logical research, not only of settlements but also themyriad features of human construction, such as roads,water wheels, dams, and hunting stations. Survey isalso useful in providing relative dates for a site’s occu-pations based on the artifacts that continuously erodefrom its soil.

Chronology

In charting Near Eastern cultural periods, archeolo-gists have developed subchronologies specific to theregion. A sketch of Near Eastern history follows,divided into seven parts.

Paleolithic

The earliest evidence of human occupation inthe Near East dates to 1.5 million years ago duringthe Lower Paleolithic period at Ubeidiya where Homoerectus tool assemblages were excavated. MiddlePaleolithic (250,000 to 45,000 years ago) settlements ofNeandertals and Homo sapiens and Upper Paleolithicsettlements of Homo sapiens were concentrated incaves such as Tabun and Skhul in Israel and now-extinctlakebeds. Paleolithic societies consisted of smallnomadic bands depending on hunter-gather sub-sistence practices and stone tool technologies.

Neolithic

Toward the end of the Paleolithic and throughoutthe Neolithic period (c. 8,500–5,000 BCE), societiesgradually adopted more sedentary lifestyles, buildingvillages and domesticating plants and animals at sitessuch as Abu Hureyra, Jarmo, Jericho, and ChatalHöyük and Hajji Firuz. Midway through the Neolithicperiod, ceramic technology was introduced into theregion. Village population grew, and along with it,disease increased in Neolithic societies.

Chalcolithic (Copper)

Toward the end of the Neolithic and the beginningof the Chalcolithic Period (c. 5000–3000 BCE), archae-ological evidence for social stratification suggests thecomplexity of political and economic institutionsincreased. Important Chalcolithic settlements includeChogha Mish, Tulaylat al-Ghassul, and Hacilar.

Bronze

Urbanism, writing, and the introduction ofbronze technology mark the Near Eastern Bronze Age

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, BIBLICAL248

(c. 3000–1200 BCE). Cites such as Megiddo, Ebla, Ur,Mari, Ugarit, Hattusas, and Susa are examples of citiesdemonstrating monumental architecture and complexpolitical, religious, and economic institutions. Expan-sive political polities with far-reaching trade networks,such as the Akkadian, Old Babylonian, Hittite, andElamite Dynasties rise and fall during this period.

Iron

Iron is introduced alongside bronze, ushering in theIron Age (1200–333 BCE), a period divided betweenindependent states during the first half and vastempires such as the Assyrians, Babylonians, and Persian(Achaemenid) Empires in the second half of theperiod. Imperial capitals such as Nineveh, Babylon,and Persepolis, as well as smaller cities like Carchemishand Jerusalem are examples of Iron Age urban centers.

Classical

The Classical Period (333 BCE–633 CE) beginswith the conquests of Alexander the Great. In theregion’s western half, the Hellenistic, Roman, andByzantine Empires dominate and integrate the regionwith their expansive Mediterranean trade networks.Many of the hallmarks of Classical civilization. suchas civic institutions, city planning, and religion areintroduced at this time. Examples such as Palmyra inSyria, Petra and Jerash in Jordan, Caesarea in Israel,

and Antioch in Turkeyreflect this Classical influ-ence. In the region’s easternhalf, first the Parthian andlater, the Sassanid Empiresdominated much of modernIran, Mesopotamia, andEastern Turkey, with theircapital at Ctesiphon on theTigris River. Both clashedoften with the Roman andByzantine Empires, as bothsides attempted to expandtheir borders.

Islamic

The Islamic Periodbegins in 633 CE with thespread of the Muslim faithacross the region and endswith the Ottoman Empire’s

collapse following the end of World War I in 1918.In the 7th century, the Umayyad, and later, the’Abbasid Empires replace the weakened Byzantineand Sassanid Empires and establish their capitals,first in Damascus, and later in Baghdad and Cairo. Atthe end of the 11th century, the European Crusadesretake Jerusalem and the Holy Land succeeded inoccupying the Mediterranean coastline, leaving theFatamids and Saljuqs divided between Egypt andIran, respectively. With the expulsion of the Crusadersin 1291, the Mamluk Empire expanded out of Egyptto control the area formerly under European occupa-tion and often clashed with the neighboring Timuridsto the east. From 1516 until 1918, the OttomanEmpire ruled Turkey, North Africa, and the ArabianPeninsula from its capital in Istanbul and from regionalcapitals such as Damascus and Cairo. The OttomanEmpire declines in the 19th century and is dismantledin World War One. The 20th century sees the divisionof the region between French and British colonialpowers, the establishment of an independent Iran andTurkey, and the eventual founding of the modernnation-states that persist today.

History of Exploration

We can divide Near Eastern archaeology’s disciplinaryhistory into five periods: Antiquarian (1500–1798CE), Imperial (1798–1914), Colonial (1914–1948),

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, BIBLICAL 249

Nationalist (1948–present), and Scientific (1970–present). The Antiquarian period was an era of arm-chair speculation. Scholars rarely visited the region,then under the Ottoman Empire’s control, andinstead relied on indirect evidence, such as the Bibleand a limited number of antiquities brought toEurope. The Imperial period began with Napoleon’s1798 campaign to Egypt, an event that the Europeanpowers interpreted as the beginning of the OttomanEmpire’s decline. In response, European countriesestablished consulates in the region’s major citiessuch as Beirut, Damascus, Baghdad, and Jerusalem,and commissioned explorers to investigate theregion’s ancient remains. With government as well asprivate funds, research centers were established tohost scholars in Jerusalem, Baghdad, and Beirut.A limited number of excavations took place duringthe Imperial period, such as W. F. Petrie’s work atTell el-Hesi in Palestine, E. Robinson in Jerusalem,A. H. Layard at Nineveh in Iraq, and J. de Morgan atSusa in Iran.

The defeat of the Ottoman Empire in World War Ilaunched the Colonial period when the British andFrench dominated Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, andPalestine. Largely considered a golden age by manyscholars, the period between 1918 and 1948 saw anexplosion of archaeological activity in the Near East.Now in full control of the region’s archaeologicalresources, archaeologists could organize large multi-year projects with guaranteed security and largeindigenous work crews. Examples include theUniversity of Chicago’s excavations at Megiddo inPalestine, Khorsabad in Iraq, and Persepolis in Iran;the University of Pennsylvania’s excavations at BethShean in Palestine and Ur in Iraq; and the Danishgovernment’s excavations at Hama in Syria. TheColonial period also saw the development of excava-tion techniques. Scholars such as the AmericanW. F. Albright and the British K. Kenyon paid greaterattention to stratigraphic relationships and developeda system of ceramic seriation, where ceramic formsand styles helped assign a date to the contexts withwhich they were associated.

The Nationalist period commenced with theestablishment of the region’s current political entitiesand continues to the current day. Now given com-plete sovereignty over the antiquities within theirborder, each country established government agen-cies that managed excavation and preservation pro-jects. Foreign archaeologists continued their work,

although now with the permission of nationalgovernments. Departments of archaeology offeringdegrees in archaeology and sponsoring their ownexcavations became commonplace in the region’suniversities. Hebrew University’s excavations atHazor in Israel, the University of Jordan’s excavationsat Tall Mazar in Jordan, and the Turkish HistoricalSociety’s excavations at Alacahöyük are only a fewexamples.

Near Eastern archaeology has undergone a periodof increased scientific rigor since 1970. While, inprevious periods, archeologists focused on recon-structing the histories of ancient Near Easternsocieties, they now seek to understand the structureand evolution of the region’s political, economic, andsocial institutions. Specialists concentrating on, forinstance, palaeoenvironment, diet and ancient tech-nologies are now a necessary part of an excavation’sresearch design. Emerging technologies such asGlobal Information Systems (GIS) and materialsscience techniques continue to push the field in newdirections and increase scholars’ abilities to under-stand the region’s dynamic ancient societies.

Contributions to Anthropology

The contributions of Near Eastern archaeology toanthropology are multiple. The region serves as hometo many of humanity’s earliest accomplishments and,because of this, anthropological inquiry has provenfruitful here. As the beginning to some of the world’sfirst sedentary communities, the Near East witnessedagriculture and urbanism’s first moments. NearEastern societies were among the first to experimentwith ceramic, copper, bronze, iron, and glass tech-nologies. Sumerian, an ancient Mesopotamian lan-guage, was among the world’s first attempts tocompose a systematic writing system using wedge-shaped cuneiform letters. This writing system per-sisted and was later transmitted to the Greeks,resulting in the invention of the Western alphabetcommonly used today. The Near East is the birthplaceof three world religions–Judaism, Christianity, andIslam—and the region contains many of their mostsacred sites: Mecca, Medina, Jerusalem, Hebron, andDamascus.

— Benjamin W. Porter

See also Archaeology; Carbon-14 Dating

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, ENVIRONMENTAL250

Further Readings

Akkermans, P., & Schwartz, G. (2004). Thearchaeology of Syria: From complex Hunter-gatherers to early urban societies (c. 16,000–300BC). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hole, F. (Ed.). (1987). The archaeology of Western Iran:Settlement and society from prehistory to the Islamicconquest. Washington, DC: SmithsonianInstitution.

Hourani, A. (1991). A history of the Arab peoples.Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Inalcik, H., & Quataert, D. (1994). An economic andsocial history of the Ottoman Empire, 1300–1914.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Joukowsky, M. S. (1996). Early Turkey : Anintroduction to the archaeology of Anatolia fromprehistory through the Lydian Period. Dubuque, IA:Kendall/Hunt.

Khurt, A. (1995). The ancient near east. London:Routledge.

Levy, T. (Ed.). (1995). The archaeology of society in theholy land. New York: Facts on File.

Meyers, E. (Ed.). (1997). The Oxford encyclopedia ofarchaeology in the near east. New York: OxfordUniversity Press.

Sasson, J. (Ed.). (1995). Civilizations of the ancientnear east. New York: Schribner.

4 ARCHAEOLOGY, ENVIRONMENTAL

With a varied and lengthy pedigree, environmentalarchaeology has grown in importance in recentdecades. What was once seen just as a loose collectionof techniques devoted to sampling past environmentshas developed into an important theoretical andmethodological research perspective. Quite simply,environmental archaeology is the study of past humaneconomic, political, and ritual behavior through thecollection and analysis of environmental remains (forexample, animal bones, soils, and botanical remains).

Historical Background

Environmental remains did not figure very promi-nently in the early history of modern archaeology.Researchers and antiquarians of the 18th and 19thcenturies primarily focused on architectural remainsand their associated material objects. Highly prized

precious metals, ceramics, and other cultural craftswere collected both systematically and quite haphaz-ardly by various individuals, museums, and universi-ties throughout this time period. The remains ofmundane meal refuse such as fragmented animalbones and botanicals received little if any researchattention and were usually discarded on the spot.

The Danish archaeologist Daniel Bruun was one ofthe first archaeologists on record to systematicallyrecover animal bones from an excavation. As part ofhis 1896 Norse excavations in Greenland and his laterwork in Iceland, Bruun consistently collected the ani-mal bones that were found as part of his research digs.Bruun believed in the possibility of having animalbones identified to species level for the purposes ofsimple economic and dietary reconstructions. Bruunsolicited the advice and skill of Herluf Winge, the headzoologist at the Royal Zoological Museum in Copen-hagen, Denmark. Winge’s early cross-disciplinarywork in zoology and archaeology at the beginningof the 20th century marked an early influence formodern environmental archaeology.

By the mid 20th century, archaeology both inEurope and the Americas was still largely the domainof avocationalists operating with a wide range ofmethods and with little interest in moving beyondartifact classification. With the writings of the Englisharchaeologist Grahame Clark, archaeology began tointerest itself in the economic and ecological aspectsof past cultural systems. Clark’s 1942 Antiquity article“Bees in Antiquity” was the official beginning of hispioneering work in environmental archaeology. From1949 to 1951, Grahame Clark supervised the excava-tions of Star Carr in northeastern Yorkshire. StarCarr, with its moist, peaty conditions, revealed a widerange of faunal and botanical material that allowedClarke the first views of early Mesolithic diet, econ-omy, and ecology. Although Star Carr has beenreevaluated more than once in the preceding years astechnologies have improved, it remains as the premierexample of early integrative archaeology.

Educated in the methods of Grahame Clarkand influenced by the ecological theories of JulianSteward and Leslie White, the next generation ofenvironmental archaeologists ushered in a period inwhich ecological theory reigned supreme. The 1960sand 1970s also witnessed a period during which uni-versity programs began to create specific environ-mental methodologies, such as zooarchaeology,paleoethnobotany, and geoarchaeology. With time,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, ENVIRONMENTAL 251

the ecological approaches and the more economicperspectives were incorporated into the processualtheory of Lewis Binford. Throughout the 1970s and1980s, processual archaeologists made use of thenewer specialties such as zooarchaeology and paleo-botany in studying past environments and the peoplethat inhabited them. During this period, environ-mental archaeology was seen more as a collection ofvarious sampling techniques than a coherent theoret-ical approach.

The postprocessual critiques of the 1980s and 1990scalled for a reevaluation of theories and techniquesboth within archaeology and cultural anthropology.Environmental archaeology has ultimately benefitedfrom the critiques that questioned the overly deter-ministic systems modeling of processual archaeology.Humans are not passive actors within the social andecological realms. Rather, humans are active partici-pants in their environment as they create, sustain, andchange their cultural adaptations. The physical envi-ronment can be seen as a record of present and pasthuman decision making (such as in economies, oursocial systems, and other decisions), a record that itselfis always changing. Out of this period of self-assessmentemerged historical ecology. Historical ecology is cred-ited to Carole Crumley, who saw the importance of atheoretical perspective that privileged the physicallandscape as the intersection between social and eco-logical systems. Within historical ecology, this inter-section (that is, landscape) could be studied throughtime as it is a historical record not only of past environ-ment but of past human decision making as well.

Methods

Current research in environmental archaeology makesuse of a wide range of techniques and specialties fromthe natural sciences. The three most commonly stud-ied lines of evidence include soil science, paleobotany,and zooarchaeology. Each of these sciences offersvaluable insight concerning prehistoric societies andtheir ecological interactions. Specialists in these areascan operate both as principal investigators withdiverse research goals and technicians providing spe-cific data for a number of ongoing projects.

Soil Science

The study of soils and sediments (pedology) iscritical to the understanding of all archaeologicalsites. With respect to archaeological sites, the study of

soils and sediments involves gaining an understandingof the predepositional (that is, before the site wasformed), depositional, and postdepositional (after thesite was abandoned) environments. Soil science canprovide details on the exact nature of ancient sites.For example, pedology can identify whether a sitewas near the edge of an ancient lake or river. It canalso provide details concerning the vegetation of theimmediate site area (heavily wooded) and the climateat the time the site was in use. Landscape and climaticchanges can also be tracked after the site has beenabandoned with the use of pedological sampling andlaboratory techniques.

Soil is sampled using a variety of techniques. Bulksoil is commonly collected from excavated surfacesin liter or larger samples that then undergo chemicaltesting. Soil can also be collected from archaeologicalsites in situ in the form of profile samples taken fromvertical, excavated surfaces. Profile samples allow soilresearchers to study the individual strata or layersof archaeological sites and their relationships to eachother. Chemical measures such as pH provide valu-able information about the potential survivorship ofvarious artifact classes. More advanced measures canhelp assess the degrees to which humans have modi-fied their immediate environment (as in field fertiliz-ing). Soil profile studies help researchers understandthe duration of site occupation as well as landscapechanges after abandonment.

Zooarchaeology

The study of animal remains from archaeologicalsites (zooarchaeology) is one of the earliest environ-mental archaeology specialties. Because of morewidely available training, zooarchaeology is morecommonly used than either pedology or paleobotany.Originally, only the more interesting animal boneswere hand selected from archaeological sites for study.Modern excavation methods now include sieve strate-gies that ensure all excavated material is screened forsmall bone fragments and other materials.

In the laboratory, with the aid of comparativeskeletal collections, attempts are made to identify theelement (for example, femur), species, age, and sex ofthe animals represented in a specific archaeologicalsite. A study of the species present can provide impor-tant information concerning the general ecology ofthe surrounding area, diet, and overall economy ofcultural groups. Hunted animals can be taken in theimmediate area of the site, or they can be transported

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


and/or traded over significant distances. In addition,domesticated animals were often a supplement toboth hunted species and botanical foodstuffs. Usingzooarchaeological techniques, researchers can oftenclarify these issues and add much to the general under-standing of an archaeological site.

Paleobotany

When preservation allows, the recovery and analy-sis of plant remains can provide some of the mostdetailed information of all of the environmentalarchaeology specialties. Plant materials were not onlya common source of nutrition but also helped pro-vide shelter, storage, and clothing. In addition, thedomestication of certain plants and trees is seen asone of the primary transformative events in humanprehistory.

Plant materials are commonly recovered fromarchaeological sites as part of bulk soil samples. Thesoil is taken to the laboratory, and the soil undergoesa flotation process, by which plant remains are sepa-rated from other less buoyant particles. The recoveredplant materials are then separated into two major sizeclasses, macrofossils and microfossils. Macrofossilsare remains that can be seen without aid of magnifi-cation, while the microfossils have to be studied withvarious levels of magnification. Seeds and plant fibersare examples of macrofossils. Microfossils includepollen, plant crystals (phytoliths), and fungi.

The recovery and interpretation of plant remainscommonly include samples from both within andbeyond the limits of the archaeological site. Samplesfrom beyond the site limits allow for the reconstruc-tion of prehistoric vegetation communities. Plantsamples from within the site limits aid in the study offood ways and economy.

Environmental Archaeology: Case Examples

As modern computer, mapping, and excavation tech-niques have continued to improve within archaeology,environmental archaeology has increasingly been seenas necessary to the more complete study of sites andthe complex data they contain. The methods of envi-ronmental archaeology are commonly used togetherwhenever possible, and they provide the most com-plete information in these situations. Interdisciplinaryresearch of this sort is logistically difficult and oftenmuch more expensive than traditional artifact-focusedresearch. Often, projects of this scale are cooperative

agreements between several universities and researchcenters, each with their own focus.

While still not utilized in many regions of theworld, environmental archaeology has a stronghistory in both the North Atlantic and the SouthPacific. Researchers in these two areas have engagedin international, interdisciplinary projects that havedemonstrated the powerful insights of environmentalarchaeology.

The North Atlantic (Iceland)

Iceland is developing as one of the key researchareas within the North Atlantic for several universitiesparticipating in environmental archaeology. Icelandprovides the rare opportunity of a clear-cut, well-dated dichotomy between prehuman landscapedevelopment and progressive human impact in nearhistoric times. As Dave Burney has convincinglyargued with reference to Madagascar, Caribbean, andPacific cases of “human island biogeography,” a keyissue for all such attempts to use islands as model lab-oratories for investigation of global human ecody-namics is both an accurate and clearly delineatedarrival date for the human actors and a detailedchronology of subsequent proposed human landscapeinteractions to sort out causality and allow effectivescale matching in modeling. The Icelandic case hasnot only the usual advantages provided by a docu-mentary record over completely prehistoric cases butalso probably the best current potential for such tightcross-sample chronological control of any island onearth via the study of volcanic ash layers or tephras.

Near the close of the 8th century AD, Nordicpirates, traders, and settlers began the expansion fromtheir Scandinavian homelands that gave the VikingAge its name and permanently changed the develop-ment and history of Northern Europe. In the NorthAtlantic, Viking Age settlers colonized the islands ofthe eastern North Atlantic (Faeroes, Shetland, Orkney,Hebrides, Man, Ireland) by circa AD 800. Iceland wastraditionally settled circa AD 874, Greenland circaAD 985, and the short-lived Vinland colony surviveda few years, around AD 1000, in the Newfoundland/Gulf of St. Lawrence region. Prior to the 1970s, mostscholars of the Viking period were philologists,medieval archaeologists, and documentary histori-ans, and the uneven written record for Viking depre-dations in Europe and the colorful and diverse sagaliterature of Iceland tended to dominate discussion ofthe period. Since the mid-1970s, research has shifted,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


as multiple projects combining archaeology, ecology,and history have been carried out all across theregion, producing a richer understanding of theNorse migrations and placing them in an environ-mental and economic context. The value of the diversecases provided by the Norse North Atlantic (initialspread of a homogeneous population into differentisland ecosystems, subsequent economic and socialdiversification, total extinction of the Vinland andGreenland colonies) has been increasingly appreci-ated by environmental historians, natural scientists,and anthropological archaeologists.

Frequent volcanic tephra (ash) layers within soilprofiles can be used to define isochrones, or time hori-zon markers. The three-dimensional reconstructionsthat can be created by mapping a series of tephra lay-ers allow detailed data on spatial patterns. Each tephralayer marks a land surface at a “moment in time,” andmultiple tephra layers constrain the passage of timeand define the rate at which change has happenedacross a landscape. Tephras can be used to correlateprecisely between cultural deposits in middens,archaeological structures, and distant landscapeelements such as boundary walls, geomorphic fea-tures, and paleoecological sample sites. Furthermore,as tephra are formed within hours or days, the distrib-ution of any one tephra through soil or in contextsthat are not contemporaneous with the initial eruptioncan be used to identify the pathways taken by sedi-ment through the environment, including temporarysediment stores, reworking of sediments, and move-ments of sediments within profiles. Tephra (in manyareas falling at least once a decade) provide isochronescovering hundreds of square kilometers but requireexpert long-term study for effective geochemicalcharacterization and conclusive identification. Whileradiocarbon dates are regularly employed in combina-tion with tephra (and with artifact analyses provideindependent dating that has generally supported thetephra chronology), Icelandic tephrachronologies area key integrative resource for fieldworkers.

Iceland’s documentary record (sagas, law codes,annals) provides rich evidence for a socially complexnonstate society that has been employed by historiansand anthropologists for studies of Iceland and thedevelopment of general theories of chieftainship.Medieval and early-modern documentary sourcesrequire critical handling but provide a rich record oflandholding patterns, legal codes, stock raising,demography, conflict and competition, and invaluable

access to internal worldview. Later records producedafter the transition to statehood in AD 1264 have pro-vided the basis for historical climatology document-ing the impacts of sea ice and early medieval climatefluctuations. A particularly detailed farm-by-farmstock and census record (1703–1712) provides aninvaluable synchronic picture of the early 18th centuryand has been used as a baseline for regional landscapeanalyses. Icelandic soils, forestry, and agriculturalscientists have actively participated in these historicalland use projects, and their further collaboration isbeing aided by special American and Icelandic researchagreements.

Since the early 1980s, genuinely interdisciplinaryfield research by Icelandic, United States, and UnitedKingdom scholars has provided a mass of new ecolog-ical and archaeological data, covering most portionsof the country but with special focus on the South andthe North. In zooarchaeology, known animal bonecollections increased from 4 to over 65, includingmassive 50,000 to 100,000 identifiable fragment sam-ples spanning the period from first settlement downto the later 19th century. The formation of the FSI(Institute of Archaeology Iceland) in 1995 by a groupof Icelandic scholars has further stimulated survey andexcavation work and direct cooperation.

Iceland was first settled during the Viking Age, andhuman impact on local animal, vegetation, soils, anddrainage patterns was rapid and profound. By AD950, 80% of the native woodlands had been cleared,and soil erosion had begun in higher elevations. Bythe Middle Ages, this loss of ground cover led to morewidespread erosion of approximately 40% of the top-soil present before human settlement (see Figure 1).Iceland thus represents an extreme case of preindus-trial human impact on the environment increasinglywell documented by archaeology, history, and naturalscience. How the early Icelandic political economyinteracted with and was shaped by the natural envi-ronment is of considerable relevance to modernsocieties in the developed and developing worldsubject to some of the same interactions of economyand landscape, with some of the same long-termresults for genuinely sustainable development.

The Pacific (Hawaii)

Although still not fully understood, successivemigrations out of Southeast Asia into the Pacificislands fueled the development of a Polynesian culture.By the first half of the second millennium AD,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


Polynesian voyagers had made their way to theHawaiian archipelago, which had until then been freeof human habitation. The Hawaiian Islands are fer-tile, high islands, and they were ideal for the intensiveagricultural methods utilized by Polynesians settlers.Until recently, it was widely accepted that Hawaii’s“pristine” presettlement environment was little affectedby the Polynesians. Multinational, interdisciplinaryresearch throughout the Pacific has begun to reveala more complex history of human/environmentalinteraction. The Hawaiian Islands are among themost intensively studied in this respect as paleo-botany, soil science, and zooarchaeology continue toshed new light on the environmental effects of boththe Polynesian and later European settlement.

Modern environmentally focused research inHawaii is first credited to Roger Green and his intro-duction of the “settlement pattern” approach in the1960s. The “settlement” approach was primarily con-cerned with how the first human settlers adapted tospecific island habitats. However, after the excavationof the limestone sinkholes at Barber’s Point, Oahu,researchers began to question the idea of Polynesiansadapting to a static and unchanging environment.

Barber’s Point revealed evidence of bird and snailextinctions immediately after the arrival of the firstsettlers. While the bird remains were evidence ofpredation, the extinct snails represented changes inthe general ecology of the island. In the early 1980s,Patrick Kirch and a team of environmental specialistsbegan a comprehensive research program to fullyinvestigate the ecological impact of Polynesian settle-ment. Using historical records, pollen, soil, and faunalsamples, researchers working in Hawaii have been ableto detail the progression of human/environmentalinteractions since Polynesian settlement.

Accounts from early Hawaiian missionaries andtravelers made note of the fern and grasslands through-out the lowland regions of the islands. Pollen diagramstaken from lowland swamp areas of Oahu indicate pre-settlement vegetation characterized by various palmspecies, including Pritchardia, which is now quite rare.Pollen diagrams showing declines in Pritchardia andother now rare lowland shrubs began by AD 800 andadvanced thereafter. Researchers suspect that palmforests were cleared to make space for agricultural pur-poses. These areas never regained their presettlementforest cover, but remained the domain of grasses,

Lowland SequenceHighland Sequence

870 AD

920 AD

870 AD870 AD

1341 AD920 AD870 AD

920 AD870 AD

1510 AD1500 AD1341 AD

920 AD870 AD

1500 AD1341 AD

920 AD870 AD

870 AD

920 AD

1341 AD

1510 AD

Human-Induced Land Degradation Profiles From Iceland (AD 870–1510)

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


shrubs, and ferns. Additional botanical analyses ofcharcoal from archaeological sites in Hawaii indicatethe initial burning of many dry-land tree species thatare now much less represented in the landscape.

The study of various land snail species (terrestrialgastropods) has also helped reveal the changing ecol-ogy of early Polynesian Hawaii. Terrestrial gastropodswere able to naturally colonize the Hawaiian Islandsbefore human arrival and were represented by over800 species. These small snails were of little economicimportance to early Hawaiians, but their adaptationto very specific ecological habitats make them idealfor recreating the immediate environment of archae-ological site areas and their transformation over time.A common gastropod sequence for Hawaiian sitesshows closed-canopy forest-adapted snails beingreplaced with more open-area species.

Zooarchaeology within Hawaiian research has alsoshown the rather dramatic impact of Polynesian set-tlement on native bird life. To date, 55 species of birdsare known to be native to the Hawaiian archipelago.According to archaeological research, 35 of thesespecies were exterminated between early Polynesiansettlement and the first arrival of Europeans. This listof now extinct birds includes flightless geese, a hawkand eagle, as well as several rail species. Researchersbelieve that the reasons for these bird extinctionsare multiple and often intertwined. Many of the birdspecies were used as food as well as a source of deco-rative feathers. Polynesian-introduced animals (dog,pig, and rat) were also responsible for the destructionof many bird habitats. Further habitat destruction onthe part of Polynesian farmers led to the demise ofstill other bird species.

Geological and soil research in the HawaiianIslands has been able to show the tandem effect of agrowing population and its increasing demands onthe agricultural production of an island environment.From an estimated settlement population of hun-dreds in the first half of the second millennium AD,Hawaii’s estimated population had bloomed to sev-eral hundred thousand by the time of European con-tact in 1778. The demand for more agricultural areais reflected in a general archaeological pattern seenthroughout the Pacific. During the initial settlementperiod, deforestation is prominent as land is clearedfor farming and building materials. Due to excessiveground cover removal, highland areas begin to erode.This erosion and associated deposition in lowlandvalleys is noted in soil profiles throughout Hawaii.

Human Ecology, Past, Present, and Future

The bounded ecosystems of island archipelagoslike Hawaii and Iceland provide ideal researchlaboratories for studying the complex multifacetedinteractions of humans and their environment. Theinteractions between prehistoric political economicsystems and the natural environment in which theyare intricately imbedded are not fully understood.What has become clear in recent decades is theimportance of interdisciplinary research drawingfrom wide areas of expertise. Individually, researcherscannot fully explore or understand the complexdynamics of human decisions regarding the naturalenvironment in which we all live. With such issues asclimate change and global warming receiving moreand more attention in recent years, the call for a morethorough understanding of human/environmentaldynamics has increased within the United Statesand Europe. Environmental archaeology providesan anthropologically informed understanding ofhuman ecology with a time depth not available toother perspectives. A well-understood past is impor-tant to any discussion of present and future human/environmental conditions.

— Clayton M. Tinsley

See also Anthropology, Economic; Ecology and Anthro-pology; Paleoecology; Political Economy; Vikings;Zooarcheology

Further Readings

Albarella, U. (Ed.). (2001). Environmental archaeology:Meaning and purpose. London: Kluwer.

Dincauze, D. (2000). Environmental archaeology:Principles and practice. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Housley, R. A., & Coles, G. (Eds.). (2004). Atlanticconnections and adaptations: Economies,environments, and subsistence in lands bordering theNorth Atlantic. Oxford: Oxbow Monographs.

Kirch, P., & Hunt, T. (Eds.). (1997). Historicalecology in the Pacific Islands. New Haven, CT:Yale University Press.

Redman, C., James, S., Fish, P., & Rogers, D.(Eds.). (2004). The archaeology of global change:The impact of humans on their environment.Washington, DC: Smithsonian InstitutionPress.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, MARITIME256

4 ARCHAEOLOGY, MARITIME

Maritime archaeology is a subdiscipline of archaeol-ogy dedicated to examining prehistoric and historicsites related to aquatic environments. This can includeshipwreck sites in an ocean, coastal ports, underwaterarchaeological remains, or any submerged land struc-tures. The terms used to describe this field of studyusually refer to the location of the sites, althoughshipwrecks found out of water may still be classifiedas maritime or nautical in nature.

Maritime archaeological sites differ from thosefound on land in several ways. One is that sites on landtend to include a complex series of occupation byhumans over a long span of time, as well as a record ofnatural occurrences during or between periods ofhuman settlement. This requires that the archaeologistcarefully recover the remains within each layer ofearth and determine how they are related. On theother hand, underwater sites such as shipwrecks basi-cally represent a brief moment in time. They containlots of objects that were on board when the ship sankand will usually include those things of everyday usesuch as dishes and utensils and not necessarily trea-sure, as typically thought by most people.

When researching underwater or coastal sites,maritime archaeologists are particularly interested inanswering questions related to how humans adaptedto aquatic environments, where seafaring developedin different parts of the world, methods for shipbuild-ing, and navigational techniques. For example, whereand when were the earliest boats built and whatmethods were employed in their construction? Howhave coastlines served as physical or social boundariesand in what ways have they facilitated human expan-sion, population growth, and the rise of social com-plexity? How did maritime adaptations develop indifferent parts of the world and what kinds of water-craft were built as a result?

The field of maritime archaeology is a relativelynew discipline. In the mid-20th century, historiansand archaeologists who worked in marine (ocean),lacustrine (lake), riverine (river), estuarine (estuary),and other aquatic ecosystems felt the need to betterfocus their research and move away from the para-digms constructed and used in terrestrial environ-ments. Early work in maritime archaeology ofteninvolved locating and recording underwater ship-wrecks, but today we would consider the methods

used to investigate and preserve these sites to be quiteprimitive. As a result, some professional archaeolo-gists initially argued that these expeditions were nomore than treasure hunts that did little to advanceour understanding of history or archaeology.

The field has advanced beyond this stage and hasnow incorporated a slew of advanced techniques, suchas Global Positioning Systems (GPS), GeographicInformation Systems (GIS), Side-Scan Sonars, andEcho Sounders to locate and record shipwrecks andother underwater features. Although similar methodsand tools may be used for surveying and excavatingboth submerged and terrestrial sites, the use of theseunderwater requires special modification to existingequipment (such as waterproof casings for cameras)and trained divers skilled in archaeological techniques.

Although maritime archaeologists can use aplethora of new technologies to learn about ship-wrecks, not everyone agrees that shipwreck sitesshould be excavated unless the objects found can beproperly preserved and undergo conservation. Someargue that important information will surely be lostor taken by looters unless it is recovered quickly andrecorded. True treasure hunters have countered thatmany sites would never be found without their initia-tive and expertise and that archaeologists are trying totake away their livelihood.

Archaeologists are interested in aquatic environ-ments because they are particularly rich in resourcessuch as mollusks, pinnipeds (such as seals), cetaceans(whales), sea mammals, fish, crustaceans, birds,amphibians, and other animals. As a result, they arehabitats that would have been extremely attractive tohumans over time and stimulated human groups toexploit and travel on them using watercraft. Coastlinesare also quite susceptible to the effects of global andregional shifts in climate, sea level changes, and naturalcatastrophes. How human beings responded to thesechanges can tell maritime archaeologists how quicklyour species rebounded from such events, the behaviorsthat resulted from the alteration of these environments(did we continue to live on landscapes that were previ-ously devastated?), and how we developed new tech-nologies to accommodate these changes.

As maritime archaeology has grown from a rela-tively obscure field of study to one highly specializedand technologically advanced, our understanding ofhuman-water relationships has been greatly illumi-nated. Archaeologists are no longer interested onlyin excavating sites and conducting pure research; they

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, MEDIEVAL 257

are concerned with protecting and preserving thosesites. We have learned investigative techniques thatare less intrusive or destructive to the archaeologicalrecord. In recent years, many countries have passed lawsdeclaring these sites public monuments and thusprotecting them from looting and desecration.

Due to the rise in popularity of this field, manyinstitutions now offer courses and degrees in mar-itime archaeology. The number of museums thathouse objects from shipwrecks and other maritime-related archaeological sites has grown significantlyand added to the human fascination with and adapta-tion to aquatic environments.

— Scott M. Fitzpatrick

Further Readings

Gould, R. A. (2000). Archaeology and the social historyof ships. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Green, J. (2004). Maritime Archaeology: A technicalhandbook, 2nd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

McGrail, S. (2003). The sea and archaeology.Historical Research, 76(191), 1–17.

4 ARCHAEOLOGY, MEDIEVAL

Defining Medieval Archaeology

The European Middle Ages or Medieval period beginswith the collapse of the Western Roman Empire in the5th century CE and ends with the European voyagesof discovery in the 15th century CE. The millennium-long era starts with the Migration period (ca. 400–600 CE), sometimes known as the “Dark Ages” dueto the paucity of written historical sources fromthis time. During the Migration period, barbarianGermanic tribes overran much of the Western RomanEmpire. Roman towns and cities declined, and manyRoman industries, such as the pottery industry inBritain, ceased to function. Roman imperial rule wasreplaced by a series of smaller successor kingdoms.These early successor kingdoms should probably beviewed as chiefdoms rather than small states. Outsidethe former Western Roman Empire, in regions suchas Poland and Scandinavia, an Iron Age way of lifecontinued until about 800 CE. Beginning around the8th century CE, many regions of medieval Europe

underwent substantial social, political, and economictransformations. Both local and long-distance tradenetworks expanded; new towns and cities were estab-lished; and by about 1000 CE, early states werefounded in many parts of northern Europe. Thestudy of these processes is of particular interest toanthropologists, since they parallel the processes bywhich complex societies developed in other parts ofthe Eastern and Western Hemispheres.

The History of Medieval Archaeology

Unlike European prehistory, whose roots can betraced back to the early antiquarians of the 17th and18th centuries, the modern discipline of Europeanmedieval archaeology did not develop until the yearsimmediately following World War II. Many Europeancities, including London, England, and Cologne,Germany, are built on medieval foundations. Thedestruction caused by bombing during the SecondWorld War made it possible to explore the medievalcores of many modern cities for the first time.

Medieval archaeology in Europe developed from twovery distinct and different scholarly traditions. Earlymedieval archaeologists who worked on the Migrationperiod and other early medieval sites were generallytrained as prehistorians. Since written records for theearly Middle Ages are often quite limited, Dark Agearchaeologists rely almost exclusively on the analysisof material remains, such as artifacts, ecofacts, and fea-tures, to reconstruct the lifeways and culture history ofthe early medieval inhabitants of Europe. For example,the early medieval (ca. 420–650 CE) village of WestStow in eastern England was discovered by a localarchaeologist in 1940. The site does not appear in anyhistorical records. Large-scale excavations, which werecarried out at the site by Stanley West between 1965and 1972, were designed to reconstruct the settlementpatterns, subsistence practices, and day-to-day lives ofthe early post-Roman inhabitants of southeasternBritain. Spatial analysis of the houses, outbuildings,ditches, and pits was used to reconstruct the settlementpattern of the village, and studies of the agriculturaland animal husbandry practices carried out there werebased on detailed analyses of the floral and faunalremains. The methods and techniques used in theexcavation and analysis of the West Stow village werethose of European prehistory.

By contrast, the early archaeologists who worked inthe later Middle Ages were often trained as historians

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, MEDIEVAL258

or art historians. In the 1950s and 1960s, archaeologistsworking in the later Middle Ages sought to usearchaeological data to answer what were essentiallyhistorical questions. For example, the initial studies ofdeserted medieval villages (DMVs) tried to determinewhether these villages were depopulated as a result ofthe Black Death (bubonic plague) in the 14th centuryor whether their desertion was the result of otherlate medieval economic and agricultural changes.These questions led Maurice Beresford, an economichistorian, to begin excavation of the deserted medievalvillage of Wharram Percy in northern England.Excavations at the site were conducted over a periodof 40 years, and the goals of the project changedthrough time. Today, studies of DMVs, includingWharram Percy, have moved beyond their historicalorigins. Studies of deserted medieval villages haveexamined the evolution of the medieval village land-scape through time, drawing on archaeological, his-torical, and ecological data.

Modern medieval archaeologists try to integrateboth historical and archaeological methods toaddress multidisciplinary questions of urban origins,state formation, and the transformation of the agrar-ian landscape through time. However, the position ofmedieval archaeology in the academy reflects its his-torical roots. Only a few European universities havestand-alone programs in medieval archaeology. InEurope, most medieval archaeologists are attachedeither to departments of history or to archaeologyprograms. A similar situation exists in North America.Medieval archaeologists, especially those working inthe Migration period and the early Middle Ages, aregenerally attached to archaeology faculties withinanthropology departments. However, some NorthAmerican medieval archaeologists can also be foundin departments of history and art history.

Medieval Archaeology Today

Medieval archaeologists are playing an increasinglyimportant role in modern anthropology. Anthropo-logically trained archaeologists recognize that therich archaeological and historical records from theEuropean Middle Ages can be used to address impor-tant questions about the processes of cultural change.Large-scale, long-term excavation projects conductedin a number of European cities have traced the originsand growth of urbanism in the European MiddleAges. The 1961 to 1971 excavations at Winchester in

southern England paved the way for many otherurban excavation projects. Working with volunteerexcavators from British and American universities,Martin Biddle, the director of the Winchester Excava-tions, explored the history of the city from pre-Romanto postmedieval times. Until the 1960s, scholarsthought that modern Winchester retained a Romanstreet plan. Biddle and his colleagues were able to usearchaeological data from a number of sites throughoutthe town to demonstrate conclusively that Winchesterwas replanned in the late 9th century in responseto the Viking control of much of eastern England.Similar 9th- and 10th-century planned towns havesince been identified from other parts of southernBritain. This systematic town planning can be relatedto the political consolidation of the Anglo-Saxon stateunder Kind Alfred the Great.

Since the beginnings of the Winchester project,major excavation projects have been carried out at anumber of other important medieval cities through-out northern Europe. Excavations at Novgorod inRussia have revealed a corpus of previously unknowndocuments written on birchbark, as well as manymusical instruments and other examples of finewoodworking. The documents contribute to ourunderstanding of the linguistic history of the Slaviclanguages, and the instruments shed new light oncraft specialization in medieval Russia. Excavations atTrondheim in Norway and Lübeck in eastern Germanyhave provided new information on the day-to-daylives of the inhabitants of medieval cities, as well asshedding light on the roles played by trade, craft spe-cialization, and political consolidation in the growthof medieval towns and cities. Archaeologists workingat sites such as Ipswich, in England, and Dorstad,in the Netherlands, have also examined the role thatlong-distance and regional trade may have played inthe reestablishment of towns in northern Europebetween 750 and 1050 CE. Ipswich and Dorstad weretwo of a number of emporia or trading towns along theNorth Sea and the Baltic that served as centers of bothmanufacturing and trade in the time of Charlemagne.

Long-term survey and excavation projects have alsoexamined the process of state formation in manyparts of northern Europe. Archaeological and histori-cal data indicate that beginning in the 8th centuryCE, early Danish kings began to accumulate a socialsurplus through tax collection. These early kingsminted coins and used their accumulated wealthto support the construction of large public works

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, SALVAGE 259

projects, such as the massive earthwork known asthe Danevirke that served as a boundary betweenDenmark and Germany. Through a comprehensiveproject of archaeological survey and selected excava-tions, Tina Thurston of Binghamton University iscurrently examining the techniques used by thenascent Danish state to incorporate the region of Thyin northern Jutland. Similar projects have been carriedout in Scotland and Poland.

One of the most interesting areas of contemporaryarchaeological research is the study of the Viking colo-nization of the North Atlantic, beginning about 800CE. Major excavation projects in York, England, andDublin, Ireland have uncovered the towns that wereestablished by the Vikings in the British Isles. Whilethe town of Dublin was established by the Vikings,York was a Roman and Anglo-Saxon town that fell tothe Viking army in 866 CE. Long-term excavations atthe site of Coppergate in York have shown that York’sViking inhabitants were engaged in a number of craftsincluding woodworking, metalsmithing, and textileproduction. Detailed environmental studies havealso shed light on diet and disease in Viking York. Theresults of these excavations are presented to the publicat the Yorvik Viking Center, which uses archaeologicalinformation to re-create York’s Viking past.

Archaeologists have also studied the Viking colo-nization of Iceland and Greenland. Before the 1970s,research on the Viking colonization of these islandswas based primarily on the study of the sagas, a seriesof documents that were written in the mid-12th cen-tury and later, long after the initial Viking settlementof Iceland around 874 CE and Greenland about975 CE. Archaeological research has identified manyearly sites in Iceland. These sites are located along thenorth and south coasts of the island, as well as in thenorthern interior of Iceland. These initial settlementsled to massive deforestation in Iceland, as woodlandswere cleared for animal pastures and for firewood.In many regions of Iceland, the deforestation wasfollowed by substantial soil erosion, rendering manyparts of the interior unsuitable for animal husbandryand agriculture.

Archaeological survey and excavation in Greenlandhave shown that two Viking settlements were estab-lished in the late 10th century CE, a larger easternsettlement and a smaller western settlement. Norsesettlers in Greenland combined animal husbandrybased on herding cattle, sheep, and goats with sealand caribou hunting. The Norse in Greenland were

unable to grow grain, and they relied on trade withEurope for both staples and luxury goods. The Norsesettlements in Greenland were ultimately unsuccess-ful; the smaller, western settlement appears to havebeen abandoned by 1350 CE, and the eastern settle-ment failed by the middle of the 15th century. Thesestudies are important because they reveal the limits ofthe northern European patterns of animal husbandryand agriculture. Farming practices that were estab-lished in northern Europe for millennia provedunsustainable in the more fragile, arctic environ-ments of Iceland and Greenland. This research showshow archaeological and environmental data can becombined to provide a well-rounded picture ofmedieval settlement and subsistence.

— Pam J. Crabtree

See also Vikings

Further Readings

Beresford, M. W., & Hurst, J. (1991). Wharram Percy:Deserted medieval village. New Haven, CT: YaleUniversity Press.

Biddle, M. (2004). Winchester. In P. Bogucki &P. J. Crabtree (Eds.), Ancient Europe 8000 B.C.-A.D.1000: Encyclopedia of the barbarian world (Vol. 2,pp. 501–507). New York: Scribners.

Crabtree, P. J. (Ed.). (2000). Medieval archaeology: Anencyclopedia. New York: Garland.

McGovern, T. H., & Perdikaris, S. (2000, October).The Vikings’ silent saga: What went wrong withthe Scandinavian westward expansion. NaturalHistory, 109, 50–56.

Thurston, T. L. (2001). Landscapes of power,landscapes of conflict: State formation in the SouthScandinavian Iron Age. New York: KluwerAcademic/Plenum.

4 ARCHAEOLOGY, SALVAGE

Salvage (or compliance) archaeology is performed inresponse to local, state, and federal historic preserva-tion mandates. Compliance archaeology ensures thatcultural resources that are likely to be impacted byconstruction are properly managed through docu-mentation and excavation before they are destroyed.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHAEOLO GY, SALVAGE260

Over half of the archaeologists working in the UnitedStates today are employed in salvage archaeology.Compliance projects comprise a growing segmentof archaeological research, with millions of dollarsallotted to projects annually.

Salvage Archaeology in the United States

In the United States, archaeological salvage projectsare completed in response to a variety of state andfederal laws, including the National Historic Preser-vation Act (NHPA), National Environmental PolicyAct (NEPA), and the Archaeological Resources Pro-tection Act (ARPA). The NHPA is the most importantof these laws and establishes a State Historic Preser-vation Office (SHPO) and officer in each state. TheState Historic Preservation officer is responsible foroverseeing implementation of the NHPA within thatparticular state. NHPA also establishes guidelinesrequiring that state and federal agencies take intoaccount the effect of any undertaking on any archaeo-logical site, building, or property that is within or iseligible for the National Register of Historic Places.

Salvage archaeology has traditionally receivedinvolvement from state and federal land managers,highway departments, the Army Corps of Engineers,and SHPOs. Some Native American groups have alsobecome involved in salvage archaeology through theestablishment of Tribal Historic Preservation Offices(THPO). Each THPO has a preservation officer whooversees NHPA compliance activities within that tribe’saboriginal territory. The Tribal Historic PreservationOfficer usually oversees salvage projects completed onNative American reservations with limited involve-ment from the State Historic Preservation Officer.

Types of Salvage Projects

There are three types of salvage projects. Phase I(or reconnaissance) surveys are the initial stage andare designed to locate sites within a particular projectarea. These types of surveys are often completedin two parts. The first part (or Phase IA) involvesgathering background information about the projectarea. Background information is gathered from avariety of sources, including state site files, historicmaps, photographs, topographic and soil maps, andoral histories. The second part (often known asPhase IB) involves the identification of archaeologicalsites through surface survey and subsurface testing.

Subsurface testing often involves the excavation ofsmall shovel tests across the project area to determinewhether cultural deposits are located within the pro-ject limits. If a site is located and appears to possessmuch of its original integrity, a Phase II excavationmay be recommended.

Phase II (or site examinations) excavations aredesigned to determine whether the site meets thecriteria for eligibility on the National Register ofHistoric Places. During Phase II excavations, largersquare test units and trenches are typically excavatedto determine the horizontal and vertical boundariesof the site and assess its chronology. Analyses at thePhase II level are more detailed than those at thePhase I level and include not only an assessment ofwhat was found but also how the resource fits withinthe local history of the project area.

At the end of a Phase II excavation, a recommen-dation is made concerning the site’s eligibility for theNational Register of Historic Places. To be eligible forthe National Register, a site must possess one or moreof the following characteristics: (a) association withthe events that have made a significant contributionto the broad patterns of our history, (b) associationwith the lives of persons significant to our past,(c) embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period, or method of construction, or (d) have yielded,or may be likely to yield, information important inprehistory or history.

If a site is determined to be eligible for the NationalRegister and cannot be avoided during construction,a Phase III excavation is initiated. Phase III (or datarecovery) excavations are designed to mitigate (orsalvage) cultural materials and features within theproject area before they are destroyed by construc-tion. Phase III excavations are usually initiatedthrough the preparation of a data recovery plan. Adata recovery plan outlines the steps that will be takento excavate the site, what research questions will beaddressed during the excavation, and what types ofanalyses will be undertaken.

Like Phase II excavations, Phase III excavations areusually accomplished through the excavation of largetest units and trenches as well as through archaeolog-ical monitoring. These excavations often producelarge quantities of artifacts and data that are synthe-sized to form the basis for the site’s interpretation.Unlike Phase I and II excavations, Phase III excava-tions often have a public outreach component andrequire that information about the excavation be

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHITECTURAL ANTHROPOLO GY 261

disseminated to the public through oral presentations,peer review articles, site tours, Web sites, and/orpublic displays.

Once a salvage project is completed, the artifacts,field records, and reports generated by the project areprocessed for curation. The curation, or long-termstorage of artifacts, is an important step in any salvageproject. The curation of artifacts not only ensuresthat they are cared for indefinitely, but proper cura-tion allows them to be used by future researchers.

Curation facilities occur in both local and regionalsettings and may include local historical societies,museums, state and county repositories, and univer-sity centers. Curation facilities housing federal collec-tions are required to abide by more stringent rulesthan those with nonfederal collections. Repositorieswith federal collections are required to maintainlong-term cataloging and conservation systems thatmeet standard museum and archival practices. Inaddition, facilities housing federal collections needto keep main collections storage areas that meet localbuilding, safety, health, and fire codes. Failure to com-ply with these regulations can put important collec-tions in jeopardy causing the data contained withinthem to be lost to future generations.

— Christina B. Rieth

See also Excavation

Further Readings

King, T. F. (1998). Cultural resource laws and practice:An introductory guide. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

King, T. F. (2002). Thinking about cultural resourcemanagement: Essays from the edge. Walnut Creek,CA: Alta Mira Press.

Newman, T. W., & Sanford, R. M. (2001). Practicingarchaeology: A training manual for cultural resourcesarchaeology. Walnut Creek, CA: Alta MiraPress.

4 ARCHITECTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY

The built environment in which we live as humans is animportant matter. The architectural landscape deeplystructures our lives. On the other hand, architecture, as

it is produced today in our urbanized environments,is based on too restricted knowledge. Postmodern“theory of architecture” is determined by the conven-tional history of art. Its narrow concept of aestheticvalues prevents scientific research and reasoning byjudgments of subjective taste. The wider humancondition is not integrated. Humanity appears onlymarginally as user and is represented by standardizedfunctional needs. Consequently, architectural anthro-pology maintains that theoretical horizons have to bewidened. The term architecture is defined in new waysby integrating it into anthropological dimensions,including primatological and paleanthropologicalconsiderations. Thus the term architecture implies:all what humans and their biological relatives builtand build.

In the late 1960s, modern architecture was maneu-vered into a crisis. Using the dynamite destruction of amodern habitat district (Pruitt-Igoe) as key incident,Charles Jencks declared the “Death of Modernism”and proposed a new era of “Postmodernism.” Pruitt-Igoe had won an architectural award before but hadfinally ended up as a slum. However, Jencks’s declara-tion was felt as a regress into the 19th century’shistory of styles by many young architects. The post-modern architectural theory, based on writtenhistory related to architecture (e.g., Vitruvianism) nowimposed by art historians, was critically questionedas a historism inadequate for the “anthropologicaldepth” of architecture. The origins of architecturecannot be found in ancient texts.

In the same period, a considerable interest devel-oped for the achievements of traditional “architecturewithout architects” as proposed by Bernard Rudofsky.Vernacular architecture now was perceived by manyas a new domain of research. Books published by PaulOliver and others made it evident that ethnology hadneglected this field considerably. Particularly archi-tects became active in this direction of research.A worldwide movement emerged with numerousinternational associations that focused on the studyof traditional environments (IASTE, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley). The most important resultof these efforts can be seen in the Encyclopaedia ofVernacular Architecture of the World edited by PaulOliver. It is a three-volumed oeuvre in folio size, withabout 2,000 contributors worldwide. The basic goalwas to globally document traditional architecture andto classify it according to anthropological criteria.The encyclopaedia is a milestone in global house

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCHITECTURAL ANTHROPOLO GY262

research. It shows the great variety of house forms invarious cultures of the world. It documents tradi-tional aesthetics and the very special structural condi-tions of related ways of life and social orders often stillfelt as exotic today.

However, theoretically, the Encyclopaedia isnot without problems. It rests largely on the level ofan anthropology of the house and uses its patterns ofexplanation from disciplinary anthropology withoutbeing conscious of the Eurocentric origins of theseinterpretations. Many characteristics of house tradi-tions cannot be explained in this framework.

Furthermore, something very important becomesclear if, in regard to materials used, we concentrateour interest on the traditional or ethnological domainof architecture. Besides durable materials, we alsofind materials of limited durability like wood or evenvery ephemeral fibrous materials. Evidently, they havethe advantage that they can be easily worked merely

by the hand. The hand as the primary tool? Binding,weaving, and so on can be seen as very ancienttechniques technologically or anthropologically. Wefind many types of roofs, walls and floors, mats forsleeping, and so on. Furthermore, there are contain-ers, means of transportation, and cages for animalsand the like. All these are important products of thisfibrous type.

In the framework of history and prehistory ofarchitecture, such ephemeral equipments are absent.Time has destroyed them. We must either put asideour intentions or change our methods. In the latter case,material culture has to be defined anthropologically.The Viennese school of ethnology, and in particularKarl R. Wernhart, has developed a new method called“structural history” or “ethno-prehistory,” which can beused for questioning the historism separating the threetemporally different disciplines in regard to materialculture. Did fibrous materials and fibroconstructive

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


processes play an important role in prehistory? Wasthe evolution of culture closely related to objects thatwere not durable? Were such objects representativefor systems of ontologically high values? Such ques-tions can be taken as a good reason to hypotheticallyintroduce a new period into the periodic system ofprehistory: (prelithic) fibroconstructive industries.We will have to support this hypothesis more clearlybelow.

There is a further important point. Architecturalanthropology is closely related to Otto F. Bollnow’santhropology of space. In his book Man and Space,Bollnow maintained that, in contrast to the homo-geneous concept of universal space, essentially adiscovery of the 14th century, cultural, or human,space is closely related to the evolution of humandwelling and settlement. This implies, first, thathuman space perception and space conception origi-nally were formed in small, local settlement units,in which architecture provided the semantic systemsfor spatial organization. Second, we have to assumea long extension process of spatial perception andconception. In addition, tectonic elements implyvertical and horizontal axial systems (e.g., “access-place scheme” or “vertical polarity scheme”). In theframework of a new “habitat anthropology,” we gainnew and objective instruments for the reconstruc-tion of basic spatiocultural patterns with oftensurprising continuities.

These prerequisites allow a new view on theanthropologically defined concept of architecture. Itworks with five classes: subhuman, semantic, domestic,sedentary, and urban/imperial architecture. These fiveclasses are relatively independent fields of research.Combined with the results of conventional physicaland cultural anthropology, they can be taken as a newfield of stimulating discussions. This shall be outlinedin the following.

Subhuman Architecture

In their book The Great Apes, the American primatol-ogist couple Robert W. and Ada W. Yerkes for thefirst time had systematically collected and studiedobservations focused on the nest-building behaviorof the pongids. They considered nest building as adaily practiced and routined constructive behaviorthat produced definitive alterations of the naturalconditions of the environment. And they postulated

pongid nest building as the beginning of an “evolutionof constructivity.”

The work of the Yerkeses was of great influence onthe following pongid research. Numerous primatolo-gists, who studied animals in their natural environ-ment, contributed important observations regardingnest-building behavior. Today we have a fairly goodview of the enormous protocultural significance ofthe nest. Particularly women like Jane Goodall, BirutéGaldikas, and Dian Fossey contributed importantstudies due to their unprejudiced spontaneity andcapacity of observation.

However, theories of hominization in generaltoday are dominated by tool-using and tool-makingbehavior. In a recent book of McGrew, it even circu-lates as “culture.” It is supported mainly by observa-tions of the use of stones for nut cracking or the useof defoliated twigs for ant fishing. However, in thenatural environment, these types of tool use are rarelyobserved. They are not part of a daily routine. Butwhy the tool use dominates is clear. It is considered tobe supported by the archaeologically established lineof tools.

If, on the other hand, the suggestion of the Yerkesesis taken seriously and the protocultural artifactcharacter of the nest is emphasized, nest-buildingbehavior is much more convincing as protoculturalactivity.

• It is intimately connected to the life of the pongids.Infants spend about 4 years in the nest of theirmother until they can build their own nest. Nestbuilding is learned. The young play with nests. Thecompleted nest produces identification of the pro-ducer with his artifact. The nest is also used in case ofsickness and imminent death.

• Nest building is a daily routine. Quantitatively too,nests are overwhelming. During its life an individualbuilds a virtual tower of about a height of 11 timesthe height of the Eiffel Tower in Paris.

• Construction implies specific physical conditionscharacteristic for humans: extensive rotation of arms,precision grip, and precise stereoscopic view whilecontrolling constructive processes.

• It has important protocultural characteristics. Itrequests judgment of constructive conditions, staticquality, and so on.

• One can even speak of the psychology of the nest:several observers noted animals expressing cozinesswhen in their nests.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


• Night camps are an eminently social arrangement.Furthermore, the night camp of a group shows astrategic organization with a secured inside and a con-trolled outside, which is spatially not much differentfrom the principles of a human apartment.

Most important is the differentiation of tree andground nests. Whether tree or ground nests are builtdepends on various factors. Weight and age of theindividuals are important, but also environmentalconditions play a decisive role. Tree nests gain theirstability from the structural condition of the tree topin which they are built. Ground nests are usually madewith rooted plant materials—bamboo stalks in a bam-boo grove, for instance. Roots act as natural founda-tions. On a height of 3 to 4 meters, the stalks are bent,broken, and knotted into stable triangles, thus form-ing a perfectly stable type of tower. On its top, the nestproper is made with thin and thoroughly interwoventwigs to form a smooth upholstery. Finally, the oftenheavy animals climb up, position themselves withtheir body into the central depression of the nest, andspend the night sleeping.

Evidently, the ground nest is a full-fledged work ofarchitecture. But the ground nest is not only a pri-mordial type of architecture. With its material andtechnical conditions, it provides the ideal environ-mental setting to plausibly explain another importantsubject of hominization: the erection of the body andthe permanent bipedal locomotion of humans. It isgenerally assumed that, due to climatic changes in atemporal period between 16 and 11 million years ago,tropical rain forests increasingly vanished and werereplaced by open savannahs and this process influ-enced hominization. Evidently, the loose vegetationat the edge of savannahs is the ideal environment inwhich this type of tectonic ground nest could bebuilt. Produced routinely by groups, the night campmust also have been of advantage selectively in regardto securely passing the night, also protected in viewof nocturnal predators.

But this complex system of constructing behaviorand its intimate relations with the life of pongids raisesa further complex of questions related to processes ofhominization: What were the factors of brain develop-ment? What was the main cause for the increase ofbrain size? Was it language, was it tool behavior, wasit due to social interactions? From the position ofarchitectural anthropology, these parameters—seenalso in mutual connection—are not apt to explain the

considerable increase of brain size of about 300%between Homo habilis and Homo sapiens sapiens.Particularly the tool behavior as it is described todaywith its monotonous processes cannot explain theexpansion of the brain.

If, on the other hand, the routined nest buildingis put into the foreground, the use of early tools ascutters for fibrous materials might have producedthe “first architectural revolution.” It was mentionedabove that the building of the pongid ground nest isbound to the corresponding biotope (rooted materi-als). Consequently, tools of the pebble tool type musthave freed constructive work from this fixationto biotopic conditions. Materials could now be “har-vested” where they grew and could be carried to the“construction site,” where they could be combinedwith other materials. Signs could now be set up freely,for example, in regard to intensified food control.Material combinations of constructions could beextended. Stable and flexible materials could be inte-grated at the same place into the same construction.A process of structural differentiation is initiatedthat might have led to an elementary material cultureof the fibrous or fibroconstructive type. Maybe the“traffic signs” made among the bonobo subgroupswhile on daily migration, as described recently by SueSavage Rumbaugh, might give some impressions onthe level of communication by fibrous signs.

Semantic Architecture

In their important ethnological study on traditionaltechnology, Walter Hirschberg and Alfred Janatashowed that fibroconstructive industries are the mainpart of material culture in traditional societies. Theyalso play an important role in the field of buildingand dwelling. The ephemera character of the materi-als and also historistic fixations have obstructed theview on the anthropological significance of tech-niques with fibrous materials. Tools are rarely used;the hand is the primary tool. The autonomy of theprocesses guaranteed by the ubiquity of the materialshints, too, to temporal depth. But evidently, the condi-tions of fibrous material culture can only be researchedin the ethnographic field.

An example: the material culture of the Ainu as itis presented by Shigeru Kayano with precise technicaldrawings is of great importance here. Kayano’s bookpresents about 250 tools and instruments that anarchaeologist never finds. A great part of the material

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


culture of the Ainu reflects their paleo-Siberian roots:simply constructed traps, nets, cages, fish traps,baskets and bags for transport, boats, weapons, toolsfor various purposes. Toys for children and statussymbols are there too, as well as small temporaryhunting huts. These objects can easily be retropro-jected into Mesolithic times, maybe even into theUpper and Middle Paleolithic. It seems that materialculture was much richer than the image archaeologymaintains.

Furthermore, the Ainu have an extraordinary topo-semantic sign system: their inau. John Batchelor, whowas considered an authority on the Ainu, describedthese signs under the Eurocentric concept of “primi-tive religion.” But earlier, Willy Kremp discovered theterritorial implications of the Ainu signs in the frame-work of a systematic survey. They are primarilyrelated to dwelling, but in an extensive sense they arealso used to control economical “incomes.” The altarbehind the Ainu house functions as a coordinationpoint for gift exchange for what all comes in from thewilderness to the house through the distinguisheddomains of hunting, fishing, collecting, and smallgardening. Hitoshi Watanabe has described the riversystem with mountain- and ocean-oriented contrastsand as it serves as orientation system in this localcosmos. Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney too has contributedimportant data for the understanding of these envi-ronmental orders controlled by signs, but she inter-preted the Ainu microcosm macrocosmologically,following Mircea Eliade’s Eurotheological concept.

Japanese agrarian culture too contains numerousindicators of autonomous local cultures with fibro-constructive industries. With the title Straw (wara),Kiyoshi Miyazaki has described this rural straw cultureof Japan in a beautiful two-volume study. There are notonly coats, bags, shoes, and other practical things butalso objects of ontologically high values related to theworldview of Japanese farmers. This fibroconstructiveculture is doubtless more ancient than what we knowfrom the Yayoi period of Japanese object culture. With-out doubt, it was carried along as vital tradition bythe early agrarian settlers. The autonomy of the tradi-tion might have been helpful for local integration.

However, most surprising in Japan are the tradi-tions that have been preserved in the framework oftraditional village Shinto: a fibroconstructive topo-semantic system that traditionally survived untiltoday in a surprising density. The elementary techno-logical characteristics appear combined with highest

ontological values (sacrality). The signs are consideredas deities or as temporary seats of local gods and arecompletely integrated into historical Shinto. In theframework of architectural anthropology, the tradi-tions can be considered as archives of local villagehistory. In the framework of cyclic renewal cults, thesigns document the early residence of ancient familiesor of the settlement founder line represented by oneor several houses. Since these houses express a mod-erate hegemony in the villages, the cult supports alsothe political and social structure of the settlement.Thus what the Western perspective considers asreligion appears to a great extent as a traditional localconstitution. The fibrous nuclear border demarcationset up at the occasion of the settlement foundationis renewed.

In the case of Japan, we become aware that suchfibrous topo-semantic demarcations must have beenan important structural characteristic of prehistoricalagrarian settlements. Guenther Kapfhammer’s bookon alpine traditions of Central Europe shows suchdemarcations also as maypoles and the like withinEuropean folklore. We find them as “fetishes” and“idols” in many traditional cultures of the world. Andwe find them historically in the framework of the so-called lower mythology of Sir James George Frazerand Wilhelm Mannhardt. Archaeologically, they areknown as life-trees in many forms (Bronze Age). Verylikely many of the rock-art “tectiformes” had similarfunctions. Semantic architecture can thus be taken asa universally spread architectural type of predomesticsignificance. Very likely semantic architecture wasthe experimental field of architectural form andcorresponding symbolic meanings.

We have often mentioned “high ontological values,”that is, high values related to local worldviews. This isan important point, which should be outlined here.The most important results of ethnological researchfocused on semantic architecture can be seen in thefact that a cognitive principle of autonomous originscould be described. It is expressed with most elemen-tary forms and is produced autonomously by theconstructive process, without any preconceived ideaof the producer. The expression can be characterizedas “categorical polarity” or “coincidence of opposites.”In the tradition of 100 villages researched by thepresent author, it is clearly shown how the primarygeometrical form, essentially as column- or hutliketype, following a trend of local differentiation, entersinto dialogue with natural forms via the coincidence

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


of opposites embedded in the same form as “generalprinciple.” Most strikingly, this happens with a treeform in some villages but also with birds, with moun-tains, or with a certain type of fish. There are also male-female contrasts, two-headed snakes, fire-spittingdragons, and so on. Somehow a primordial metaphor-ical world, which, however, has its clear objectivebackground. The convergence of artifact and naturalform happens through the categorical polarity ofthe topo-semantic system, respectively, through the“polar analogy” of both forms. The artificial formsremain dominantly characterized by structural con-ditions, technically and geometrically.

Regarding the prehistorical question of howhumanity discovered natural forms, this can providemodels of how the environment was organized byconscious perception. Landscape too seems to bestructured according to this principle of polarity.Time can be perceived in polar relations and similarlyelementary social hierarchy. The dialogue betweensemantic architecture and natural form can be usedas a model for the cultural perception of nature onthe level of categorically polar analogies. Very likelypolarity, as a cognitive system, has produced anelementary aesthetic revolution that can still beobserved in many traditional societies. And in fact,it structurally survives into many aspects of modernperceptions. Its origins could be assumed in theMiddle Paleolithic, that is, between Homo sapiensand Homo sapiens sapiens. This process of cognitionmight also have contributed considerably to theincrease of brain capacity.

Domestic Architecture

By assuming a primary topo-semantic stratum in thearchitectural evolution outlined, we gain new indica-tors for the development of domestic architecture.The so-called shelter theory, that is, the assumptionthat humanity invented protective roofs or wind-breaks against excessive climatic influences, revealsas functional retroprojection. Huts and houses haveto be interpreted as composite developments. Wediscover basic architectural schemes like the “accessplace scheme” in which semantic architecture definesthe elementary plan with “place- and gate-markers”combined with other elements derived from semanticarchitecture. House altars and house gods reveal asplace markers and sacred doorposts as gate markers.Consequently, as Gustav Ränk has shown, traditional

house plans are often extremely conservative in spiteof changing materials and flexible outer form of thehouses. The ontologically high ranking demarcationsappear fixed by cyclic cults, which were originallyfocused on their renewal. The fire in the open hearthreveals as an independent construction, whichentered the house or the hut while preserving its ownontological autonomy. Similarly the roof. It can bederived as independent development of hutlike signs.

This program was essentially derived from twotraditions studied in depth, that is, from varioushouse types of the Ainu and from farmhouses ofJapan. Both house traditions, with all variations, arenot developed according to functional principles.Both correspond to accumulations of relativelyindependent elements derived from a predomestictopo-semantic layer, which defined living space withcyclically renewed topo-semantic demarcations. Thiscreates a central and important requisite for theresearch of houses: related cults must be includedinto research.

Sedentary Architecture

In the following we discuss an important insight ofthe approach: the evolution of territorial control andsedentary life. In the Mesolithic, a cultural dimensioncomes up that can be understood from its developedform but cannot be reconstructed archaeologicallywith its factual conditions. Here too the ethno-prehistorical method shows a new potential to betterunderstand the phenomenon of the increasing capac-ity for territorial control and, finally, of permanentsedentarity from its institutional conditions.

We can assume that processes related to territo-rial control like broad spectrum food collection(Mesolithic), permanent sedentary village cultures(Neolithic), and formations of cities and states withsocial hierarchy (Bronze Age) were not isolatedevents but were structurally coherent parts of a widerdevelopment.

An earlier study of the present author hinted tosources that support the thesis that topo-semanticterritorial demarcations of the fibroconstructive typehad been an important equipment of the Middle andLate Paleolithic (grave flowers of Shanidar, tecti-formes and female figures in rock art).

The Mesolithic, then, is characterized by increasinglysedentary communities and by the capacity to collecta broad spectrum of food. However, the conditions of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


the new level are not clear. On the other hand,comparison with the ethnological situation clearlyshows the importance of topo-semantic systems. Inthe case of the Ainu, it is evident that broad spectrumfood gathering is controlled by a fibroconstructivetopo-semantic system. In the framework of a categor-ically polar system, the topo-semantic signs relatethe antithetic categories of inside and outside. Thefibroconstructive signs form the threshold pointsof gift exchange between humans and wilderness.Rooted in the intimate space of dwelling, they extendinto wider zones of hunting and collecting withinthe valley as home range of the Ainu. A complexsystem of categorical polarity also controls time,social role, and communal cooperation. In short, thecomparison with the ethnological situation gives usvery clear ideas about the structural conditions andontological principles according to which extendedterritorial control systems could have evolved.

The Neolithic is prehistorically characterized bypermanent agrarian settlements and domestication.More or less permanent occupation of a territorybecame important with pastoralism and agriculture.However, the question of how settlements were insti-tutionally organized remains open. Architecturalanthropology assumes that topo-semantic demarca-tion systems present already in the Mesolithic periodbecame dominant in Neolithic times. They provedhighly efficient in the protection of sedentary lifeand consequently produced high ontological valuesamong local populations. Crucial are the terms nuclearborder and settlement core complex.

Nuclear border demarcations were set up in themiddle of settlements. The fibrous demarcationremains within the controlled zone of the settlement.The categorically polar structure of “semantic archi-tecture” is projected spatially toward the outside, pro-ducing village plans with complementary surfaces,functional and nonfunctional domains. First, thismust have been effective within regional settlementsystems. It developed also a system of ontological val-ues that further protected the settlement. Polarity hadbecome an established ontological value related to thesigns. They were used as models of the harmoniousorganization of space, time, and social organization.This implied also a primary type of aesthetics, whichprovided value to the settlement as a whole.

The cyclic renewal of the same fibroconstructivedemarcations introduced temporal depth into thesettlement’s consciousness. Furthermore, an elementary

social hierarchy developed within agrarian villages.Through cyclic cultic renewal, the demarcation systemremained related to the foundation of the settlement,an aspect that is locally shown in the founder houseline. The founder house develops hegemonic claims.In the renewal cult, its representantive appears withdominant functions. He is priest and chief or ruler ofthe settlement. Thus, the topo-semantic system hadthe function of a traditional local constitution. Whatwe defined as semantic architecture can be taken as ascriptless archive of settlement history, very likely abasic institution of Neolithic village cultures.

Urban and Imperial Architecture

Bronze Age formation of early civilizations is thefield where architectural anthropology clearly showsits validity. Due to rich archaeological sources, theanthropological method outlined provides consider-able new insights into institutional processes, due tothe ontological values related to architecture and alsodue to the constitutional institutions it came to formin Neolithic times.

Conventional archaeology and history organizethe rich Bronze Age finds as the beginning of earlyhigh culture. They admire the wealth of forms andattribute these surprising phenomena to the greatpower of early civilizational invention. For the causesof the enormous social and institutional changes,well-founded explanations are lacking. Some con-sider new irrigation systems as the main cause, othersemphasize new population densities or new marketdevelopments.

However, the archaeological interpretation ofsources has neglected an important point. The largerpart of sources shows obvious indicators of fibrocon-structive prototypes in texture and formal structure.This is valid for temples, temple columns, innermostsanctuaries, temple gates, stelae, imperial or regionalsymbols on thrones, pillars, life trees, and so on.

Walter Andrae was a prominent figure of theGerman architecturo-archaeological research, whichwas active in Mesopotamia and ancient Egypt in the1930s. Andrae has strongly emphasized this aspect of“metabolism” between ephemeral and durable mate-rials in this domain. In his book The Ionian Column,Built Form or Symbol? he presented a great quantityof archaeological sources supporting the thesis of afibroconstructive substrate among predynastic villagecultures of the ancient Near East and Egypt. Based on

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


this substrate, he interprets the Greek columns of theIonian or Corinthian orders as bundled fibrous plantcolumns “metabolized” into stone. They are thus placedclose to the plant columns of the Egyptian temples.

In other words, what archaeology describes as ahighly creative level of “early civilization” reveals basi-cally as a metabolized reproduction of fibroconstruc-tive architecture and material culture of predynasticvillage cultures, including corresponding sociopoliti-cal structures. The prototypes did not show with thearchaeological method.

This leads to an entirely new evaluation of earlycivilization. Innovations were essentially of techno-logical character. The first cities and empires owedtheir existence mainly to the “monumentalization” ofcyclically renewed fibrous “documents” of the consti-tutional archives of predynastic villages. They werecopied into durable materials, which allowed the spa-tial extension of empires. Villages could be controlledfrom impressively built cult centers as the top institu-tion of a monumental theocratic system of territorialcontrol. The material expenditures of the cyclic vil-lage cults were centralized on the higher level as taxesand labor. This allowed the accumulation of wealth inthe centers. The cyclic time concept of the villages wassuperseded by linear time, expressed by “eternal”buildings. The evident causality of the cults in thefoundation of the villages and the corresponding local

ontology became supersededby complex divine genealo-gies, with their origins pro-jected into imaginary timedepths (myths).As HermannKees has clearly described,hegemonic processes thendeveloped on the regionaldistrict level as well as onthe imperial level with corre-sponding cults and temples.The originally autonomousagricultural settlement wassubdued to centralized con-trol by means of the mon-umentalized cult system.Theocracy appeared as poli-tical form.

Architecture defined inan anthropologically widerframework reveals newaspects of the human con-

dition with regard to territorial organization andsedentarization as well as in view of the formation ofearly civilizations. Based primarily on “constructiv-ity,” architecture appears closely related to the subhu-man and human existence. But architecture cannotsimply be considered as a part of the Eurocentricartist-art scheme, nor can it be reconceived in its con-ventional circles. The methods have to be extendedtoward global horizons introducing perspectives ofanthropological temporal depths.

— Nold Egenter

Further Readings

Egenter, N. (1986, September). Software for a softprehistory; Structural history and structuralergology as applied to a type of universallydistributed “soft industry”: Sacred territorialdemarcation signs made of nondurable organicmaterials. In Archaeological “objectivity” ininterpretation (Vol. 2). [Precirculated papers].TheWorld Archaeological Congress, Southampton andLondon. Southampton, UK: Allen & Unwin.

Egenter, N. (1990). Evolutionary architecture:Nestbuilding among higher apes. Internationalsemiotic spectrum of the Toronto semiotic circle,14 (September), 1–4.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARCTIC 269

Egenter, N. (1992). Architectural anthropology—Research Series: vol. 1. The present relevance of theprimitive in architecture (trilingual ed.: English-French-German). Lausanne, Switzerland: EditionsStructura Mundi.

Egenter, N. (1994). Architectural anthropology—Semantic and symbolic architecture: Anarchitectural-ethnological survey of one hundredvillages of Central Japan. Lausanne, Switzerland:Editions Structura Mundi.

Egenter, N. (1994). Semantic architecture and theinterpretation of prehistoric rock art: An ethno-(pre-)historical approach. Semiotica, 100, 2/4,201–266.

Egenter, N. (2001). The deep structure of architecture:Constructivity and human evolution. In Mari-JoseAmerlinck (Ed)., Architectural anthropology(pp. 43–91). Westport CT: Bergin & Garvey.

Implosion Research Series Online. (1996). Retrievedfrom http://home.worldcom.ch/~negenter/005_ResSerOnline.html

Kayano, S. (1978). Ainu no Mingu [The tools andinstruments of the Ainu]. Tokyo: Ainu no MinguKanko Rendo Iinkai.

Savage-Rumbaugh, E. S., Williams, S. L., Furuichi, T.,& and Kano, T. (1996). Language perceived:Paniscus branches out. In W. C. McGrew and T.Nishida (Eds.), Great apes societies (pp. 173–195).Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Wernhart, K. R. (1981). Kulturgeschichte undEthnohistorie als Strukturgeschichte. InW. Schmied-Kowarzik & J. Stagl (Eds.),Grundfragen der Ethnologie. Beiträge zurgegenwärtigen Theorien-Diskussion (pp. 233–252).Berlin, Germany: Dietrich Reimer Verlag.

4 ARCTIC

The Arctic is the region of Earth where the sun neverrises for one 24-hour period in the winter and neversets for one 24-hour period in the summer. This areahas been demarcated as north of the 66.5° northlatitude and includes the northern parts of Alaska,Canada, Greenland, Siberia, and the Svalbard archi-pelago, which lies 700 km north of Norway. In thesummer, the air temperature reaches 22°C (71.6°F),and in the winter, the temperature stays around −50°C(−58°F). In some regions, temperatures have beenrecorded as low as −70°C (−94°F).

Because of the frigid conditions, the Arctic haslong been thought of as uninhabitable and as aborder to the edge of the Earth. Notwithstanding,curiosity fueled the desires of some to investigate thislittle-known territory. The first Arctic explorer wasPytheas, a Greek navigator from the colony ofMassilia, around 325 BC. Pytheas christened hisdiscovery Ultima Thule, which means “the outermostland.” The present-day location of Pytheas’s “outer-most land” is debated, but theories of its locationrange from Iceland to Norway. After Pytheas came,more explorers, notably, the Norsemen, in the9th century AD. One of the more famous of theNorsemen to travel to the Arctic was the Viking, Ericthe Red, who was banished from Iceland to laterdiscover the territory he named Greenland.

Arctic exploration really flourished toward theend of the 15th century when John Cabot, a Venetian,proposed the idea of a Northwest passage to India.This spurred many attempts to find other traderoutes. However, it was not until the early 19th cen-tury that the incentive for Arctic exploration changedfrom commercial to scientific. Much of the outerregions of the Arctic were known at the time, but theinterior was still unexplored.

William Parry was the first to attempt the rigoroustrek to the interior of the Arctic in 1827. His journeyto the North Pole was unsuccessful, but he paved theway for future explorers, including the GermanCaptain Karl Koldeway, the American Charles FrancisHall, and British Captain Sir George Nares. TheNorth Pole was finally reached in 1909 by Americanexplorer Lieutenant Robert Edwin Peary.

With the advent of flight, the Arctic became muchmore accessible and opened up to research in manyareas, such as natural resources, pollution, and cli-mate. Natural resources of the Arctic include oil,petroleum, minerals, and wildlife. In addition, theArctic is unique and ideal for studies on pollution andclimate because of the cold weather, prolonged peri-ods of light and dark, and the virtual absence ofanthropogenic sources of pollution.

The first people credited with mastering the extremeArctic environment were hunters from northeasternSiberia who lived about 40,000 years ago. Some of thesehunters crossed the Bering Strait and expanded acrossArctic North America. Archaeologists refer to thesepeople as Paleo-Eskimos. (Note: The term Eskimo isno longer used and has been replaced by the termInuit.). Arctic dwellers are compactly built, having a

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARDREY, ROBERT (1908–1980)270

barrel-shaped torso and short arms and legs, whichminimize heat loss. Today, there are almost 120,000Inuit still living in the far north. Many live with moderncomforts to varying degrees in towns or small settle-ments throughout the Arctic. Through the combinedefforts of these local communities, the early explorers,and contemporary researchers, we now know muchmore about a part of our planet that was once believedto be uninhabitable and partly unknowable.

— Kathleen C. Smith and Lisa M. Paciulli

See also Aleuts; Eskimos; Inuit

Further Readings

Bottenheim, J. W. (2002). An introduction to theALERT 2000 and SUMMIT 2000 Arctic researchstudies. Atmospheric Environment 36, 2467–2469.

Liversidge, D. (1970). Arctic exploration. New York:Franklin Watts.

Sugden, D. (1982). Arctic and Antarctic: A moderngeographical synthesis. Totowa, NJ: Barnes & NobleBooks.

4 ARDREY, ROBERT (1908–1980)

American anthropologist, author, and playwright,Robert Ardrey was known for his contributions toanthropology, the gilded stage, and silver screen. Bornin Chicago, Illinois, Ardrey’s interest in science andwriting were sustained after attaining a PhD from theUniversity of Chicago (1930). Though performingnumerous jobs to support his first wife and twochildren (Ardrey was married twice: Johnson in 1938and Grunewald in 1960), Ardrey’s efforts resulted innumerous plays and screenplays; among the popular-ized were The Three Musketeers (1947), MadameBovary (1948), The Secret Garden (1949), TheAdventures of Quentin Durand (1955), The Power andthe Prize (1956), The Wonderful Country (1959), TheFour Horseman of the Apocalypse (1962), Khartoum(1966), and Thunder Rock (1939, 1943, and 1985).However, Ardrey’s contribution and popularizingof science stemmed from his major works: AfricanGenesis: A Personal Investigation into the AnimalOrigins and Nature of Man (1961), The TerritorialImperative: A Personal Inquiry into the Animal Origins

Source: © iStockphoto/Tomasz Resiak.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARDREY, ROBERT (1908–1980) 271

of Property and Nations (1966), The Social Contract: APersonal Inquiry into the Evolutionary Sources of Orderand Disorder (1970), and The Hunting Hypothesis(1976). Interested in both human origin and humanbehavior, the discovery of Australopithecus in Africainfluenced Ardrey’s scientific perspective for theremainder of his life; he died in Cape Providence inSouth Africa.

Contributions and Perspectives

Robert Ardrey’s contributions to the anthropologicalperspective regarding our species can be consideredboth iconoclastic and intellectually provocative.Drawing upon the observations of paleontologists,zoologists, psychologists, and work in sociobiology,Ardrey attempted to explain our species behavior,primarily in terms of aggression, within a naturalisticframework. The basis for his speculation regardinghuman behavior is not grounded in myth, theology,mysticism or unrealistic metaphysics; rather, his viewwas drawn from scientific speculation based on scien-tific evidence. As an anthropologist, Ardrey wasgrounded within an evolutionary structure.

The influence of Charles Darwin (1809–1882)upon science cannot be understated. Darwin’s theoryof organic evolution created a scientific framework forour species’ existence and behavior. Regarding ourspecies’ evolution, speculation as to the place whereour species evolved varied; for Darwin, our species’origin was in Africa. For others, Asia became the pointof constructive speculation. Although Darwin’s cri-tique of human behavior falls short of contributionsgiven by sociobiology, the significance of culture andderived behavior was put into an evolutionary frame-work. However, the physical evidence needed to refineplausible speculations was lacking. Although discover-ies of fossil hominids would increase scientific aware-ness of human origin, it would be the discovery ofAustralopithecus by Raymond Dart that would influ-ence Arudrey’s depiction of human behavior.

Based upon the work of Dart and contributions ofprimatology, Ardrey stated that our primal behavior,similar to that of other primates, is rooted in our evo-lutionary past (whereas any differences are due tothe evolution of the human brain). As depicted bythe evidence regarded by Dart, Ardrey supported thebelief that our hominid ancestor, Australopithecusafricanus, was aggressive, skillful (use of tools), and a“culturally advanced” Pliocene killer (killer apes).

Consequently, human behavior that became romanti-cized and supported an anthropocentric view wasreevaluated as being deeply instinctual primatebehavior. Behavior derived from the need of suste-nance, reproduction, and territory, closely linkedby the complexity of the human brain, modified thisinstinctual aggressiveness that was depicted by Dart’sspecimens (evidence). In Ardrey’s opinion, unlikeearlier evolutionists’, our species’ moral nature was nodifferent than any other animal’s moral nature. Thisis due to the territorial imperative, whereby territoryis the principal stimulus in this natural morality.In an evolutionary process, Ardrey depicted that the“moral” life is played and identified within these ter-ritories or arenas. The drama and interconnectednessof life, via territorial periphery, creates the probabilityfor instinctual aggression; albeit aggression may notbe fatal. Behavior, inter- and intragroup populations,is regulated by what Ardrey terms the “amity-enmitycomplex” (prompted by external and internal threats),which provides an individual a means for identity,stimulation, and security.

Source: © David Lees/CORBIS.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARGENTINA272

Although Ardrey’s portrait of human behavior isdevoid of any romanticism or metaphysical autonomy,the truth of the underlying biological factors does notdetract from the human experience. Humanity, for allits virtues and vices, is greater than the sum of its bio-logical parts, though the former is solely derived anddependent on the latter. Yet, Ardrey’s convincing expla-nation of human aggression, as with all animal aggres-sion, does not bode well for the human animal thatis capable of destruction on a massive scale. Perhapsit was the close affinity with other primates (social,biological, and behavioral) and modern technologicaladvancements that stimulated Ardrey’s interests inthe present human condition. This is particularly trou-blesome when considering ourselves progeny of ourancestral “killer apes.” Though critics had pointed outcracks and fissures in Ardrey’s theoretical framework,Ardrey never wavered from Darwin’s sentimentsregarding our species in relation to the great apes: Wediffer only in degree and not in kind.


See also Australopithecines; Dart, Raymond A.; Evolu-tion, Human; Missing Link

Further Readings

Ardrey, R. (1963). African genesis: A personalinvestigation into the animal origins and natureof man. New York: Delta Books.

Ardrey, R. (1966). The territorial imperative.New York: Atheneum.

Ardrey, R. (1970). The social contract: A personalinquiry into the evolutionary sources of order anddisorder. New York: Atheneum.

Dart, R. (1982). Adventures with the missing link.Philadelphia: Institutes for the Achievement ofHuman Potential.

Dawkins, R. (1999). The extended phenotype. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

4 ARGENTINA

Argentina is the second largest country in SouthAmerica with a population of 39,144,753. Althoughthe official language is Spanish, Italian culture influ-ences the food, music, and traditions of Argentina,

making it unique from other South Americancountries. Significant numbers of Spanish, Basque,Irish, German, British, mestizo, and other ethnicgroups also influence Argentina’s cosmopolitan andmulticultural society.

Argentina is a republic, declaring its independencefrom Spain’s dominion in 1816. A bright yellow sunwith a human face sits in the center of the light blueand white stripes of equal width that make up its flag.Argentina’s native population was greatly diminishedafter 1502 when the Europeans imposed their classsystem of guaranteed privilege to the rich. With only1% of the population controlling 70% of the land, theArgentinean economy relied heavily on export ofgrain and beef. The political system was also con-trolled by the rich, led by a succession of presidential,military, and civilian governments.

In 1943, a member of the military, which wasin power at the time, staged a coup against his owngenerals to become one of the most memorable pres-idents for the common people. Juan Peron took lead-ership among the labor unions of Argentina and wasthe champion of the working-class people, as washis second wife, Eva. A member of the working class,Eva (affectionately called “Evita”) was known for herflamboyant style as well as her extreme generosity andservice to the general public. The Peron legacy endedwhen the economy went sour, Evita died of cancer, andthe military again took power.

In the 1960s, the military leadership grippedArgentina with a rule of political violence, respond-ing to armed leftist guerrilla challenges. Ernesto“Che” Gueverra, a martyred leftist revolutionary,emerged as a prominent figure in Argentinean historyand folklore during this time. Gueverra was a com-rade of Fidel Castro and fought to spread Marxistideas in Argentina. In response to political opposi-tion, the military declared a state of internal war,known the world over as the “Dirty War,” in whichapproximately 6,000 citizens disappeared between1976 and 1982. Suspected leftists and members oftheir families were tortured, raped, and brutally mur-dered. This had the effect of all but destroying laborunions and any other forms of political organization,that is, except for the Madres (mothers) of the Plazade Mayo, who met every week in front of the capitalin Buenos Aires to protest the kidnapping of theirfamily members and to demand their release. As aresult of the actions of the Madres and other humanright’s groups, Argentines have effectively pressured

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARGENTINA 273

the government to reform its structure. And while itstorrid past generates little confidence in democraticprocesses, Argentina now has a democratically electedpresident. Elected in 2003, Nestor Kirchner addressedthe corruption of the supreme court and the federalpolice. Members were impeached, dismissed, or retired.

Argentina’s economy has long suffered from risinginflation and a skyrocketing deficit. Argentina owesover $21 billion to multilateral institutions. In oppo-sition to dominant global economic influences,including the United States, Kirchner refuses to refi-nance the debt in terms defined by the InternationalMonetary Fund. Priorities are focused on stabilizingthe Argentine peso, reducing the high rates of unem-ployment, investing in agricultural productivity,stabilizing internal markets, addressing high crimerates, reducing inflation, and securing trade relation-ships with Brazil.

Argentina makes up most of the southern cone ofthe continent. The environment is highly varied, con-sisting of the Andes in the west, highlands in thenortheast, the pampas in the east, the Gran Chaco inthe north, and the arid plateaus of Patagonia in thesouth. The fertile grassland plain of the pampas is

home to the capital city of Buenos Aires, built on thewealth of cattle ranching. Here roamed the infamoussymbol of Argentina’s heritage, the gaucho. Thesenomadic cowboys lived on horseback and off theland. Gauchos dressed in bombacha pants and tallleather boots, using boleadoras (lassos with threemetal balls at the end) to rope cattle. Gauchos playedthe guitar and demonstrated a wide range of technicalcapabilities in their performance of the milonga,an instrumental solo. They are credited with thegrowth of Argentina’s leather industry and method ofbarbequing beef, the asado. The gaucho also intro-duced yerba mate, an herbal tea made inside a hol-lowed gourd, to Argentine culture. Yerba mate is nowsipped from gourds coated with silver, often througha silver straw.

The Patagonia region of Argentina contrastsstarkly with the bustling pampas region. Frigid tem-peratures and high winds, due to its extreme southernlatitude, make Patagonia barely habitable. The fewpeople who live there are mostly highly adaptedindigenous populations, who herd sheep and gua-naco. The southernmost point on the continent ofSouth America is located in Argentina and Chile at

Source: © Photo by Philip Douglis, The Douglis Visual Workshops.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARISTOTLE (384–322 BC)274

Tierra del Fuego, or “land of fire.” It was named thusby the first European sailing explorers, who sawthe lights of native campfires on the shore. Anotheramazing destination for ecotourists from all over theworld is Iguazu Falls, located in Iguazu National Parkon the border of Argentina and Brazil. The waterfall,consisting of around 275 individual falls, is about2.5 miles long and drops about 269 feet.

Argentines are religiously devoted to their favoritesport, futbol (soccer). They are always serious con-tenders for the World Cup soccer tournament, whichthey won in 1978 and 1986. Argentineans are proudof Diego Armando Marodona, considered by many tobe the best soccer player in the world. In addition tothe Argentine national team, there are many popularteams in Buenos Aires. The Rio Plate team and BocaJuniors have an ongoing rivalry that creates muchexcitement in Argentina. Polo is another popularsport. The game consists of a ball and mallet and isplayed on horseback. It was traditionally played bythe gauchos and resembled a game of tag on horse-back. Initially, a duck was the intended object to beretrieved from the other team.

Argentines are equally passionate about the tango.Originally considered a statement of social protestby the poor, the tango is a highly intimate and almostobscene dance. It emerged as a sarcastic expressionagainst European wealth and social dominance in the1880s, representing the sexual relations between pros-titutes and their upper-class patrons. During a militarytakeover of Argentina in 1955, the tango was outlawedfor a time in the country because it expressed bothsocial and political freedom for the working class andthe people of the slums. Tango Argentino, a stage spec-tacle, was a hit on Broadway and in Paris duringthe 1980s. The highly technical and musically sophisti-cated dance form is now the source of much nationalpride and a major tourist draw in Argentina.

Argentina’s political history has been the subject ofmany literary and theatrical works. Poet Jorge LuisBorges is internationally famous. The musical pro-duction Evita, dramatizing the life of Evita Peron andfeaturing the hit song, “Don’t Cry for Me Argentina”received international acclaim and was followed byan award-winning film. Lawrence Thornton’s novel,Imagining Argentina, the story of the “disappeared” ofthe 1970s, was also released as an international film.

— Elizabeth A. Dyer

See also Tierra del Fuego

Further Readings

Borges, J. L. (1999). Everything and nothing (D. A.Yates, Trans.). New York: New Directions.

Feijoo, M. del C., & Gogna, M. (2002). Women in thetransition to democracy: Argentina’s mothers ofthe Plaza de Mayo. In D. B. Heath (Ed.),Contemporary cultures and societies of LatinAmerica (3rd ed., pp. 375–383). Prospect Heights,IL: Waveland Press.

Lewis, P. H. (2002). Guerillas and generals: The dirtywar. New York: Praeger.

4 ARISTOTLE (384–322 BC)

Aristotle was an ancient Greek philosopher and scien-tist, one of the key intellectual figures in the history ofWestern philosophy and culture. He was for centuriesauthoritatively known as “the Philosopher,” becausehis philosophy as well as his science dominatedWestern civilization for about four centuries, afterthey were resurrected for the European culture in the12th century. Aristotle’s understanding of a humanbeing as naturally rational and sociopolitical animalmakes him a forerunner of naturalistic conceptions ofhuman nature that can be studied empirically.

Life

Aristotle was born at Stagira (known also as the“Stagirite”) in Northern Greece, to the family ofphysicians at the royal court of Macedon. At the ageof 17, he moved to Athens in order to study at Plato’sAcademy, where he remained for 20 years until Plato’sdeath (347 BC). Then, he moved to Assos on the coastof Asia Minor. He was welcomed there by the localtyrant Hermias, whose niece he married later. AfterHermias’s execution by the Persians in 345 BC,Aristotle moved to Mytilene on the island of Lesbos,where he met his most famous pupil and associate,Theophrastus. It is thought that there, Aristotledevoted a lot of his time to his empirical studies ofmarine biology. In 343 BC, he was invited to the royalcourt at Mieza by Philip II, King of Macedon, in orderto become a tutor of his 13-year-old son Alexander.After 3 years of tutorship, Aristotle left his pupil, whobecame very soon the conqueror of the world, known

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARISTOTLE (384–322 BC) 275

as Alexander the Great. In 335 BC, Aristotle wasback in Athens, where he set up his own school,the Lyceum. After the death of Alexander the Great in323 BC, he was forced to leave Athens. He returnedto a family estate on the island Euboea, where he diedthe next year, at the age of 62.

Works

It is estimated (based on book catalogues inAristotle’s ancient bibliographies) that he wrote anunbelievable 550 books, the equivalent of about 6,000modern pages. But even more impressive than thevolume is the range of topics he covered: from philos-ophy, logic, and natural sciences to psychology, ethics,politics, and aesthetics. Unfortunately, the majorityof these works were lost, and among those are allhis published texts (which had a form of Platonicdialogues). What has been available for the last2,000 years, known as Corpus Aristotelicum, consistsof about 2,000 modern pages, and it is a collection ofvarious Aristotle’s lecture notes, esoteric texts for hisstudents, which were not intended for publication.Arrangements of these texts and titles of collectionswere done by the editor Andronicus of Rhodos, about250 years after Aristotle’s death. This explains variousinconsistencies, contradictions, and general inele-gance of many of Aristotle’s surviving texts, includingMetaphysics. This is the main reason why we cannotstudy Aristotle like the majority of other philoso-phers, such as Descartes or Kant, who have writtencompact philosophical treatises. Surprisingly enough,these later compilations of Aristotle’s working draftshave had some of the most profound effects on thedevelopment of philosophy, science, and the wholeEuropean culture.

Philosophy and Science

For Aristotle, the universe, furnished with materialobjects, is a true reality that can be investigatedand truly known, and it is not just a shadow ofthe “other reality,” which is more real because it isunchangeable, like a world of eternal Platonic formsor Pythagorean numbers. Aristotle agreed with Plato,that true knowledge (epistémé) has to correspond tosome unchangeable reality, but he was convincedthat such reality is within this permanently changingmaterial world. Of course, it is hidden, and it hasto be revealed by a new scientific method, which

he developed. This method is a combination ofempirical observations with rational analysis basedon induction and deduction. But first of all, lan-guage, the medium of all knowledge, had to be trans-formed into a scientific tool (organon) and Aristotle,having done this, established a new scientific disci-pline: logic.

Paradigmatic fundamental entities of reality forAristotle were organisms: plants, animals, and humans.This is the reason why Aristotle devoted so muchinterest to their studies (one quarter of all Aristotle’ssurviving works are biological) and did it in a suchsystematic way, setting up biology as a scientific disci-pline. They are integrated wholes, composites ofmaterial stuff and internal principle, which Aristotlecalled form (eidos), nature (physis), or essence. Thisinternal principle is a cause of the existence of indi-vidual and a cause of what the individual looks likeand to which natural kind he or she belongs. Forms/natures/essences are eternal and unchangeable, but

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARSUAGA, J. L. (1954–)276

they do not exist (as Platonic forms do) separatelyfrom individuals. And they are at the same time inte-grating principles of composite individuals; they areresponsible for goals of individual developments andtheir functionality. Aristotle believed that essencescould be and had to be recognized by his scientificapproach, and then finally described in words as defi-nitions. Definitions are combinations of genus proxi-mum and differentia specifica, and in this way, theyreflect a real internal and eternal structure of theworld, built up from natural kinds and relationshipsbetween them.

Human Nature

According to Aristotle (Politics, Book 1), the “human(anthrôpos) is by its nature a sociopolitical (politikon)animal (zôion).” The Greek word politikos is usuallytranslated as a political and sometimes as a social, butit is neither of these terms as we understand themtoday, and therefore it is better to render it by thesociopolitical. Aristotle pointed out that it is humannature to become an integral part of a community,and he believed that the Greek city-state (polis) wassuch a community. Polis is not an artificial structure,set up by human individuals for some pragmatic rea-sons, but a natural entity like a colony of bees, wasps,ants, or cranes. But Aristotle was quick to stress thatthe “human is a social animal in a sense in which abee is not, or any other gregarious animal,” becausethe human is “alone among the animals, rational”(literally, animals “which have logos”). Humans alonehave an ethical perception of what is good and whatis bad, what is just and what is unjust, and thanksto logic, humans can communicate and share a com-mon view on these and similar matters. The human isa fully realized being, a citizen (polites), which meansparticipation in judicial functions and in politicaloffices of a city-state (unfortunately, according toAristotle, women and slaves were naturally excludedfrom this). A city-state is a final stage of natural socialdevelopment, which starts from pair-bonding andhousehold, then goes further, to a larger communityof village, and finally ends with the city-state. InAristotle’s view, human sociality is continually turn-ing to politics as its natural goal.

— Peter Sykora

See also Scientific Method

Further Readings

Ackril, J. L. (1981). Aristotle, the philosopher. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Barnes, J. (1995). The Cambridge companion toAristotle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gotthelf, A., & Lennox, J. G. (Eds.). (1987).Philosophical issues in Aristotle’s biology.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

4 ARSUAGA, J. L. (1954–)

At present, the codirector of the Atapuerca project,Juan Luis Arsuaga Ferreras (1954–) is one of thetwo most outstanding Spanish paleoanthropologists.Full professor of human paleontology at UniversityComplutense of Madrid, he has been a member of theresearch team of Atapuerca site since 1982, whenEmiliano Aguirre organized a multidisciplinary groupto study this hominid site. In 1991, he became codirec-tor of the Atapuerca research team, which was awardedin 1997 with the Principe of Asturias prize, the mostimportant scientific research award in the Hispanicworld. Furthermore, Arsuaga became a member of theNational Academy of Sciences of the United States.

Arsuaga is famous worldwide for his finding atSima de los Huesos, which is a small cavity at the endof a ramp, accessed by a 13-meter vertical shaft, atCueva Mayor, Atapuerca. The Sima de los Huesos isone of the most productive paleanthropological sitesin the world, because at least 28 different individualshad been identified. Several very well-preserved andalmost complete craniums, mandibles, pelvis, femurs,hands, and feet have a mixture of ancient and moderncharacteristics. Some are similar to their Neandertaldescendants and others to their ancestors, the firstEuropeans. These findings allowed Arsuaga and hiscolleagues to publish many papers in the most presti-gious scientific journals.

In the field of anthropology, Arsuaga is specialistin human skeletal morphology, biomechanics, sexualdimorphism, taphonomy, paleoetology, paleopathol-ogy and phylogeny of hominids. His discoveries ofseveral skeletons of Homo heidelbergensis in Sima delos Huesos allowed him to propose a new phylogenyfor the Homo sapiens lineage. Apart from his mainresearch in Atapuerca, he has participated in the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ART, UNIVERSALS IN 277

excavations of other hominids sites in Spain and inthe Early Pliocene Middle Awash site in Ethiopia.

Several of Arsuaga’s books are best sellers in Spainand have been translated to other languages, includ-ing English, for example, The Neanderthal’s Necklace:In Search of the First Thinkers (2002) and The ChosenSpecies: The Long March of Human Evolution (2005).Nevertheless, his most notable book is El Enigma dela Esfinge (2001), which is a metaphor to explain themechanisms and the enigma of the purpose of evolu-tion. His writings are excellent popularizations of hisfindings in the Atapuerca site, explaining very clearlyand rigorously his evolutionary theories regarding theorigin of humankind.

— Eustoquio Molina

See also Atapuerca; Bermúdez de Castro, J. M.; Crea-tionism Versus Geology; Homo Antecessor; Orce

Further Readings

Arsuaga, J. L. (2002). The Neanderthal’s necklace:In search of the first thinkers. New York: Four WallsEight Windows.

Arsuaga, J. L., & Martínez, I. (2005). The chosenspecies: The long march of human evolution.Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Arsuaga, J. L., Carretero, J. M., Lorenzo, C., Garcia, A.,Martínez, I., & Bermúdez de Castro, E. (1997). Sizevariation in Middle Pleistocene Humans. Science,2777, 1086–1088.

4 ART, UNIVERSALS IN

From a strict anthropological point of view, informedby the recent self-critical turn of the research, it is adebatable issue whether we should admit universalsin art. It is equally an open question as to whether artis indeed a universal form of expression and commu-nication. In what follows, we will attempt to lay downthe conditions of the possibility of admission of uni-versals in art as well as of considering art itself as oneof these universals.

Anthropology has been formed as a social sciencein the course of 19th century and in the context of thegreat European colonial states. The European need tounderstand the non-Western world was concomitant

with the desire to maximize the benefits acquired bythe exploitation of the colonies. As a result, for a verylong time, anthropology was based on empirical dataand fieldwork, without really being concerned for itsepistemological status as a science or with question-ing its approaches to other cultures. This situation hasradically changed in the course of the last 50 years,and anthropologists have systematically criticized thecolonial, ethnocentric approach to other cultures aswell as the epistemological basis and object of anthro-pology as a science. The term reflexive anthropologyindicates that a scientific approach to non-Westernsocieties is difficult and complex and, furthermore,requires both relentless critique and uncompromis-ing alertness as far as questions of method are con-cerned. There is an increased awareness today of theperils and problems associated with central conceptslike primitive art for example, which manifest aderogatory attitude to creative aspects of the materialculture of non-Western societies, even when accom-panied by the best intentions, as in the case of FranzBoas. This is the reason why the adjective primitivehas almost unanimously been replaced by the termnon-Western or small-scale. Apart from carefully scru-tinizing terminology, anthropologists have recentlyturned their attention to their own society. In cooper-ation with the rest of human sciences and by imple-menting in their own society the approach reservedfor non-Western societies, anthropologists have oftengenerated impressive results of acute, hermeneuticanalysis of Western institutions, customs, attitudes,and modes of behavior. One may here indicativelymention the pioneering work of Mary Douglas, ormore recently of Jonathan Culler. If anthropologiststend to criticize the most intimate conventions oftheir own cultures, it is likely that they will be reluc-tant to accept unconditionally universals, which areconventions with cross-cultural application.

Art is a universal term that has been employed inthe anthropological study of other cultures as anextension of its conventional use in the Westernworld. There are two interrelated problems concern-ing this employment: First, there is a serious problemof definition of art, even within European aesthetics,let alone in cultures that lack terms that even approx-imately translate as art, and second, the notion of artis an instrument of value if it remains undistin-guished from fine art, a pervasive term in Europeanculture with relatively recent origins in the 18th cen-tury, as Goehr indicates. To render a concept of art

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ART, UNIVERSALS IN278

relatively functional in anthropology, it ought not bean instrument of value, restricted to fine art, butshould rather be open and meant in the broadest waypossible, to allow the analysis of objects from othercultures in their own terms. This is the reason whyAnderson attempts to define art via skill and Laytonvia aesthetic factors, expressive considerations, andcommunication. However, anthropologists of artshould not be limited by the objects included in anyof the Western categories of art or by the Westernaesthetic categories. Should art serve as a category ofcultural differentiation, it needs to be a very acceptingcategory and should indeed arise out of a thoroughand careful consideration of all related contexts,attributes, and conditions as they apply to each andevery unique case studied.

In the Western world, by “art,” we mostly meanpainting and sculpture. In few cases, anthropologistsare able to transfer this concept intact to other cultureswithout making any adjustments. In most cases, theyare obliged to adopt a concept that encompasses craft,folk art, the ethnographic artifact, as well as music,dance, architecture, and literary arts, such as myths,proverbs, stories, songs, and the like. The Europeandistinctions between high and low arts or between fineand practical arts are not operative in most of thesmall-scale societies. Provided that the material culture

of each small-scale societycomes first and that theanthropologist is willingto respect this priority, wecan find recourse to a greatnumber of definitions for artthat anthropologists havefurnished us with in thecourse of their research.Such definitions are interest-ing not solely for analyzingobjects of small-scalesocieties but also for Euro-pean culture too. For thestudy of non-European arthas always been intrinsicallyconnected with the interestsand research in Western arthistory and aesthetics.

Art is thus definedthrough the institutions ofsociety, by recourse to theintention of the artist, to the

attributes of the objects, and in connection with thereception of these objects. There is always a complexinterrelation between individual intention, inter-pretative context, and institutional or attributivedefinitions that ultimately depends on additionalparameters, such as the time and place of the objectcreation, tradition and the general circumstance ofcreation, and presentation and reception of the object.Skill, function, religious or ritual meanings, ideas, andaesthetic and expressive factors are attributes, whichhelp understand and delimit artistic objects. Weusually find recourse to the category of art when it isimpossible to include material objects in more nar-rowly defined categories. In such circumstances, wehave had several definitions of art professed by thefield experts: Morphy claims that artistic objects havesemantic and/or aesthetic properties used for presen-tational or representational purposes and that art ingeneral is a system of meaning and communication.Gell has defined art as the technology of enchantment.Levi-Strauss defines art as an ordering system of signsand communication, like language. Anderson main-tains that all cultures recognize as artworks certainhuman-made, material artifacts of significant culturalmeaning and of exceptional mental or manual skill,produced in media that make sensuous effects, andsharing stylistic conventions with objects of proximate

Source: © iStockphoto/Dan Brandenburg.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ART, UNIVERSALS IN 279

geographical and temporal origin. Finally, Laytonconsiders artwork as a ritualistic symbol.

The role of the artist varies significantly from oneculture to the other. The artist may incarnate a genius,an idea that is still popular in Europe due to thelegacy of romanticism, or may simply be an artisanwho knows how to apply the conventions inheritedby a cultural tradition, performs a social function,and is indistinguishable from his or her audience. Insome societies, the artists are among the privilegedclasses, and in others they enjoy no distinction what-ever. In most cases, however, the artist is that personwho has a certain technical aptitude, a capacity ofdoing or fabricating something that reproduces andpropagates the values of the society in which he or shelives. Very often, the artist must conform to certaintypologies and rules governing the fabrication ofobjects and is therefore judged in accordance withthem and not by recourse to the intention of produc-ing something. On the other hand, the Eskimo wood-carver works without any intention whatever and inthe process accidentally “discovers” a form out of thisaimless carving.

When it comes to the category of artwork, theresearch interests of European and American arthistory that have placed the emphasis either on formor on meaning and function have always conditionedit. Until the 1960s, the analyses of artworks and cul-turally significant objects aimed at (a) integratingthem in evolutionary or diffusionist hypotheses,(b) revealing their formal properties, or (c) creatingtypes associated with culture areas, tribes, or schools.Since the 1960s, the increasing interest in meaningformation and symbolism has generated a lot of stud-ies of artworks and elements of material culture,often from an interdisciplinary vantage point thatcombined anthropology, archaeology, art history, andaesthetics and aimed at exploring both meaning andform. The most revealing approach to form is usuallythrough function. What an object does and what it isused for better discloses details of its constructionand shape, although there are many cases of practicalobjects, like weapons and other quotidian, highlydecorated tools, whose function is independent fromits artistic decoration and only appropriated by it.Artworks and other significant cultural objects per-form a number of functions: Biebuyck reports howsuch objects are used in male initiation ceremoniesamong the Lega of Central Africa, and Morphy demon-strates the association of art with the sacred and with

images of ancestral power in Yolngu, an AustralianAboriginal people. Often possessing artworks is a signof power and prestige and secures the status, rank,and control of leaders like in the Tiv, the people ofNorth Nigeria. This is the reason why access by thepublic to such artworks is either limited or prohibitedand, in any case, remains strictly regulated by thosewho possess or safeguard them. Artworks supplementthe social rituals, help maintain the traditions andreproduce the existent hierarchies, become emblemsthat reflect the unity of social groups, and at times,house the spirits and therefore bring health and suc-cess in the endeavors of those that carry them. Formcaptures semantic, aesthetic, and functional proper-ties of the object; how a formal trait is encoded influ-ences its meaning and effect to others. Artworks andother significant objects generate meaning in animmense variety of ways, which depend on form,function, context, and reception. In any case, under-standing this meaning by cultural outsiders requiresa careful acknowledgement of all the previouslymentioned parameters as well as their integration inlarge-scale social and cultural settings.

Cultural outsiders always face the temptation andchallenge to group things under the heading of style.Style, according to Morphy, denotes the way an objectformally communicates meaning and concerns theproperties of the work considered as symbol. But stylealso refers to the formal ways in which different arti-facts are similar to each other and may ultimately leadto structural distinctions and properties of the socialor cultural system. In his 1962 authoritative study ofstyle, the art historian Meyer Schapiro defined styleas a system of forms with quality and meaningfulexpression, revealing the artist and his world. He evenstated how modern artists feel a spiritual kinship withthose of primitive societies due to their frank andintense expression and their effective participation incollective life. However, he still called for an adequatetheory of style that would thoroughly meet thehistorical problems and address, at a deeper level, theprinciples of form construction, the problems ofexpression, and the processes of social life and emo-tional behavior. Schapiro had probably sensed thelimitations of his theory, which basically point to theproblems of the concept of style itself, stemming fromits neat separation between form and meaning,between decorative and semantic elements, and fromits strong presupposition of creative agency and moti-vation, behind the form. However, the separation of

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ART, UNIVERSALS IN280

form and meaning cannot be absolute, let alone thefact that in many cases of European as well as non-European art, this binary opposition hardly makesany sense.

Style may be a useful concept to the extent that itleads to summoning structural aspects of art and cul-ture, such as principles of representation. Tracingsuch principles of representation does not mean deci-phering whether the evolution of motifs in visual artsworks from figurative icons to abstract, noniconicpatterns or vice versa, although for a very long timeand until Boas’s radical criticism of cultural evolu-tionism, anthropologists were extremely preoccupiedwith such concerns. Boas authoritatively establishedthat abstract and figurative designs have a long andancient history that reaches back almost 30,000 years;they emerge independently in different contexts butmay also coexist or succeed each other within thesame civilization. Thus, style concerns more thanquestions of technique and method, since it has beennoted that civilizations with relatively similar techni-cal methods and apparatuses produce different styles.

Style may also be conscious or unconscious depend-ing on whether it is based or not on explicit motiva-tion. Stylistic conventions like color signification arearbitrary no matter whether they denote likeness orstylization. The concept of style can be studied as avessel for the crystallization of religious, moral, andsocial values and for communicating them via theemotional impact of forms. These functions of styleallow art objects to be evaluated: In the case of figura-tive designs, objects are valued in relation to theextent to which they comply with the original repre-sented, whereas in cases of abstract or geometricalpatterns, objects have to comply to definite rulespassed on by tradition. The process of evaluation isusually reserved for powerful people, who are familiarwith stylistic conventions, object placement, context,and how such objects integrate in the larger socioeco-nomic and religious issues. In cases of geometrical orabstract stylistic conventions of small-scale societies,Western anthropologists must make an extra effort tofamiliarize themselves with the traditions of suchsocieties if they ever hope to decipher meanings andworldviews.

Still, however, familiarization with tradition andstylistic conventions vitally depends on the world-views of the observer. A case in point is the issue ofsplit representation, which has drawn attention bymany anthropologists. Split representation refers to a

design technique in the art of the North American,northwest coast that Boas was among the first tostudy. However, Levi-Strauss remarks the analogies ofthis design technique in areas such as China, Siberia,and New Zealand, which are incompatible geographi-cally and historically. Split representation refers to thepainted figure of an animal, divided in half all acrossits body and open in its interior, in an elaborative,symmetrical manner, representing one individual infront view with two profiles. Split representationis employed for decorative purposes of quotidianobjects, like globes, boxes, and columns. For Layton,the motivation behind split representation is thedesire to represent well, accurately, and from all possi-ble points of view the elements of the animal figure.For Levi-Strauss, the recurrence of this specific repre-sentational method among different cultures sowidely separated in time and space denotes a deepermeaning, namely, a deeper and more fundamentalsplitting between the dumb biological individual andthe social person whom he must embody. Split repre-sentation thus denotes the personality split, the con-trast between the actor and his or her role, and thesocietal request of strict conformity between thisactor and his or her role, a favorite motif in Frenchphilosophy and psychoanalysis at the time of Levi-Strauss’s texts. The difference between the two viewsis relative to the difference between two conceptionsof anthropology: on one hand, anthropology as asocial science of fieldwork, data, empirical analysis,and a limited number of general conclusions andon the other hand, anthropology as a social sciencethat uses fieldwork to extract general principles anduniversals concerning kinship, social organization,religion, mythology, art, and the like and to establishthose key motifs that may explain the vast syncretismof life forms.

The example of split representation makes clearhow the approach to non-Western, representationaltechniques becomes an occasion that brings on sur-face our own differences, in values, thought, writing,and methods. The recent shift of interest in anthro-pology toward the study and understanding ofpresently existing societies probably has to do withthe realization that we Westerners, who seek to knowthe other, are fundamentally unknown to ourselves.The anthropological attitudes of uncompromisingthinking, critical alertness, and careful reflectionought now to be also directed to our world in ordernot only to explain the differences that Westerners

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE 281

have between them but also to learn from them.Art can indeed be a bridge between Western andnon-Western worlds, but has recently been revealedas also a means to better appreciate and safeguard thediversity of Western world.

— Constantinos V. Proimos

See also Aesthetic Appreciation; Cave Art; CulturalConstraints; Rock Art

Further Readings

Anderson, R. L., & Field, K. L. (Eds.). (1993). Art insmall-scale societies: Contemporary readings.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Coote J., & Shelton, A. (Eds.). (1992). Anthropology,art, and aesthetics. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.

Layton, R. (1991). The anthropology of art.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Morphy, H. (1991). Ancestral connections: Art and anaboriginal system of knowledge. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.

Schapiro, M. (1994). Theory and philosophy of art:Style, artist, and society. New York: Braziller.

4 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

Artificial intelligence (AI) is the capability of devicesor mechanisms and machinery to perform func-tions usually associated with human intelligence,including scientific systems, reasoning, optimiza-tion through experience, and automated motorsystems. The American Association for ArtificialIntelligence (AAAI) is dedicated “to advancing thescientific understanding of the mechanisms under-lying thought and intelligent behavior and theirembodiment in machines,” and it aims “to increasepublic understanding of artificial intelligence,improve the teaching and training of AI practition-ers, and provide guidance for research planners andfunders concerning the importance and potentialof current AI developments and future directions”.It publishes the Journal of Artificial IntelligenceResearch.

What had been the imaginative machines of intel-ligence in science fiction of the 20th century (from

the writings of Jules Verne, Arthur C. Clarke, andIsaac Asimov to the motion pictures Forbidden Planetand 2001: A Space Odyssey) is now the reality ofthe 21st century, featuring computers, neural net-works, machines, robots, and humanoid robots.Spurred by the technological necessities of outerspace explorations by satellites and human missions,gigantic gains in computers and high-efficiencysmart technology were made in the latter half ofthe 20th century.

AI is widely employed in machine tool automa-tion, where artificial neural networks are applied tosophisticated operations by using fuzzy logic andgenetic algorithms so that system ranges can be iden-tified, problem solving by conceptualization canoccur, and search algorithms can adapt and evolve.Development of AI in machine tool automation hastaken place in the study and application of AI systemsin science through the computer modeling of a pro-gression of natural systems. Examples of applicationsare the ATM bank card and PIN, photographic cam-eras, vending machines, computer chess playing,financial portfolio computer banks, automobile partssystems, speech-responsive computers, sophisticatedmedical technologies, such as hearing aids and heartchips, computer-designed patterns on textiles, elec-tronic music, and educational and recreational com-puter games.

In the field of cognitive science, neuroscientistshave employed sophisticated computer-driven imag-ing techniques including CAT, PET, MRI, CST, andother techniques to view and analyze the brain, withinsights into the human mind. Their findings suggestthat discoveries of the relationship between technol-ogy and thoughts and emotions, stress and brainfunction, and new paradigms of thought and geno-types and disorders are forthcoming. The brain orintranet will be more fully understood, enhanced, anddeveloped.

The Internet has evolved. Intelligent systems havebeen developed by connecting computer intelligenceand the Internet, enabling people to talk to smartcomputers and build a global communication system,referred to as the “Intelligent Internet” by William E.Halal. Halal described the UCLA Cultural VirtualReality Laboratory Web site that recreates ancientRome, Amtrak’s speech recognition software, theWaldorf Astoria Hotel’s video-conferencing system,IBM’s Super Speech Recognition Program, MIT’sProject Oxygen, Wells Fargo’s Speech Recognition

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE282

System, Internet Search Engines Voice RecognitionSystems, General Motors OnStar driver assistanceprogram, Sprint’s voice dialing, AI use to guidehuman action figures in computer games, Internetavatars or virtual robots, digital TV monitors, and atalking, seeing, listening and learning computer, asexamples of the Intelligent Internet.

Humanlike robots such as ASIMO, Honda’shumanoid robot, can simulate the walk of a humanand can use its arms, walk down stairs, sideways,backward, and around objects. Robots are likely to beused in the same environments as humans, especiallyin space settlement.

Space settlement includes exploration of outerspace, utilization of space materials, and construc-tion of and habitation in space colonies. Prototypicalcolonies including Biosphere II and NASA’s BioplexComplex employ vast AI technological systemsto maintain life support. Space missions to theInternational Space Station and the planned mannedmissions to the Moon and Mars necessitate sophisti-cated AI systems of geographical control, life sup-port, and social\psychological well-being to meetthe exigencies and dangers faced by astronauts iso-lated in an extreme environment. Construction ofindustrial sites and habitats for humans who migratefrom Earth will require advanced AI systems, wherelife, direction, and functioning are shaped by AItelecommunications more advanced than NASA’sMission to Planet Earth and Earth ObservationSystem, which provides air, water, land, glacier, andpollution data.

— Stewart B. Whitney

See also Computers and Humankind

Further Readings

American Association for Artificial Intelligence.(2005). http//www.aaai.org/

Halal, W. E. (2004, March–April). The intelligentInternet. The Futurist, 38. http://www.wfs.org/futcontma04.htm

Negnevitsky, M. (2002). Artificial intelligence:A guide to intelligent systems. New York:Addison-Wesley.

Whitby, B. (2003). Artificial intelligence: A beginner’sguide. Oxford: OneWorld.

ARTIF ICIAL INTELLIGENCE

The subfield of synthetic anthropology is concernedwith examining the ways in which scientificadvances, including artificial intelligence, may beused to expand human knowledge andunderstanding of the cultures in which humans live.At the beginning of the 21st century, one of themost intriguing advances in artificial intelligencehas been the development of Project Halo, designedto create a system known as Digital Aristotle (DA),named after Aristotle (384–322 BCE), the Greekphilosopher who was thought to possess much ofthe world’s knowledge as it existed in his time.Project Halo is a multistage project undertaken byVulcan, Inc., that will place the world’s scientificand philosophical knowledge into a highlyadvanced computer system that will ultimately beable to reproduce and explain that knowledge,answer questions based on that knowledge, andgenerate solutions to problems using the knowledgeit possesses. Once the project is completed,scientists with narrow, specialized fields ofknowledge will be able to use Digital Aristotle toplace their own knowledge into a broader contextand identify possible ramifications of an action orsolution to a problem. In addition, Digital Aristotleis perceived as a significant advance for teachingscience in the nation’s schools. The moving forcebehind the project is Microsoft cofounderPaul Allen.

The 6-month-long Phase I of Digital Aristotle,which was completed in May 2003, consisted ofthree teams of experts from the fields of chemistry,biology, and physics. Each team entered 70 pagesof chemistry textbooks containing all knowledgeneeded to pass the Chemistry Advanced PlacementExamination. Team One was made up of membersfrom SRI International, with assistance from BoeingPhantom Works and the University of Texas atAustin. Teams Two and Three were Cycrop andOntoprise, respectively. Each team was charged withdeveloping the technology that would allow DigitalAristotle to formulate knowledge, answer questions,and generate explanations using its inputtedknowledge. At a cost of approximately $10,000 perpage, Phase I was only partially successful in

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE 283

4 ASANTE

The Asante (or Ashanti) are a Ghanaian people num-bering about 1.5 million (about 15% of the popula-tion of Ghana) and centered in the city of Kumasibut also occupying the entire Ashanti region, whichis bordered by Brong-Ahafo, western, central, andeastern regions. The Asante are members of the Akanlanguage and cultural group (about 45% of the popu-lation of Ghana) which occupies much of central andsouthern Ghana and includes, in addition to the

Asante, the Adansi, the Agnyi, the Agona, Akim, theAkwamu, the Akwapem, the Bono, the Denkyira, theFante, the Kwahu (all in Ghana), and the Baoulé ofCôte d’Ivoire. Although these peoples have dialecticdifferences and some cultural differences, their strongcultural and linguistic similarities (Twi, of the Kwalanguage family) point to common ethnic origins,which have been strengthened by occasional politicalunities over the centuries.

Asante territory is primarily rainforest, lying justbeyond the coastal region. Toward the south, theforest is lush and dense where it is not farmed; northof Kumasi, the forest gradually gives way to savannah.The major rains fall from May until October, with abrief break in late July or August; humidity is con-stant and high. In December and January, the har-mattan winds blow down from the Sahara, and the airbecomes parched and dusty. Rivers and streams areabundant; the soil is red laterite, which provides agood building material. Gold, bauxite, and timber aremajor natural resources for export; cocoa the majorcash crop; and yams, cocoyams, maize, and cassavamajor consumer crops.

History and Political Structure

While their Akan ancestors were probably in the areaof central and southern Ghana for several thousandyears, the modern Asante are the descendants of theAsante empire, which was at its at peak during the17th through the 19th centuries and was the largestand most powerful kingdom of the Guinea Coast, atone point controlling most of modern-day Ghanafrom the coast to Yendi, and including parts of what isnow Côte d’Ivoire and Togo.

Although iron and agriculture were undoubtedlyimportant factors in the development of civilizationsin this region, iron probably becoming common byabout 300 AD, it was surely the trade in gold to theSudanic empires of Ghana, Mali, and Songhai, begin-ning in the first millennium AD, which led to theeventual wealth and power of the Akan states. Asantegold was traded across the Sahara by these empires,along with kola nuts and ivory from the rainforestregion.

Sometime during the 12th or 13th centuries,Akan-speaking people began to enter the region ofmodern Ghana. Some historians explain this as amigration from the disintegration of the Sudanickingdoms to the north and from encroaching Islamic

achieving its goals of developing the technologyneeded for the project. Even though all three teamsscored only three out of a possible five points, theteams did succeed in identifying problems andsuggesting steps to take in subsequent stages.

On February 12, 2004, Vulcan, Inc., announcedthat Phase II would be completed in three steps.Step One was identified as a six-month designstage, followed by a 15-month stage dealing withimplementation of Digital Aristotle. Using theknowledge and technology gained in the first twostages, the proposed 9-month-long Step Three wasscheduled to employ three teams that would inputchemistry and physics textbooks, which containedthe knowledge needed to pass the Chemistry andPhysics Advanced Placement Examinations. Thethree teams were charged with developing thenecessary technologies in five fields aimed atmaking Digital Aristotle a reality: knowledgerepresentation and reasoning (KR and R),knowledge acquisition, understanding of naturallanguage, usability, and system integration. Thethree teams for Phase II are SRI International, withmembers from Boeing Phantom Works, theUniversity of Texas at Austin, and the University ofMassachusetts at Lowell and Krake; Team Ontoprise,with members from Carnegie Mellon University; andTeam ISX, with members from iSoco, StanfordMedical Informatics, the University of SouthernCalifornia’s Information Science Institute, KSVentures, and Klein Associates.

— Elizabeth Purdy

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE284

rule, though linguistics suggests a shared ancestrywith other southern forest groups such as the Yoruba.In either case, independent villages, perhaps seekingcontrol over the gold mining or the long distancetrade (which came to include trade in slaves), beganto combine into small states. By the 17th century, theDenkyera (or Denkyira) and Akwamu emerged as themost powerful of these, and after the wars of 1650 to1670, the Denkyera reigned supreme. Osei Tutu, anephew of the chief of Kumasi, was sent to Denkyeraas a hostage along with regular annual tributes ofgold and slaves. Osei Tutu became a general in theDenkyera army, but eventually revolted and fled backto Kumasi, where he succeeded to the Kumasi stoolupon the death of the chief, about 1697. Kumasi andother subject kingdoms were being exhausted by theirannual payments to Denkyera, and Osei Tutu deter-mined to put an end to this. Sending the Denkyeratax collectors home without their hands, a declara-tion of war, he defeated the Denkyera army, capturedand beheaded their king, and, with the advice andwisdom of his chief counselor and friend, the priestOkomfo Anokye, put together a loose confederationof kingdoms.

It is undoubtedly due to the brilliance of OkomfoAnokye that this loose confederation became such apowerful nation. As recorded in oral history, Anokyehad Osei Tutu call together a great durbar of all thechiefs and royalty of the confederation. As the skyturned black and thunder rolled, a golden stool camefloating down from the heavens and settled upon thelap of Osei Tutu. Anokye explained that this stoolwould now contain the soul of their nation anddirected that everyone sacrifice to the stool. A medi-cine was made containing their hair and fingernailclippings, which they poured upon the stool and alsodrank, thus pledging their allegiance not to theAsantehene himself, but to this stool, the GoldenStool, which came to be the symbol of the new nation.

The Golden Stool is more than a mere symbol,however. To this day, it is kept in secrecy, only beingbrought out for the most sacred of occasions, such asat the enstoolment of a new king. No one sits on it;instead, it rests on its own stool. It never touches theground, and Asantes believe that if the stool were everto be harmed or taken, the nation would cease to exist.

Osei Tutu expanded the army, introduced a moreformal organization which better protected the gener-als, and developed customs of integrating conqueredstates and their chiefs, gathering them annually at

Kumasi to renew their allegiance to the Golden Stooland to celebrate the unity of the empire, a ceremonyknown as Odwira. Osei Tutu and his successor,Opoku Ware I, were responsible for further expan-sion, annexing the northern states of Bono, Gonja,and Dagomba. By 1750, at the death of Opoku Ware,the Asante controlled about 100,000 square miles anda population of two to three million. Osei Kwadwo,the fourth Asantehene, expanded Asante a bit furtherto the north, thus bringing many Moslems into thekingdom and instituting a period of religious toler-ance, even appointing some Moslems to the court.Successive Asantehenes developed a large bureau-cracy of professional administrators and craftspeople,as well as well-trained police and soldiers. The Kotokowas the highest council of elders, mostly local, andbelow them was a council of 200 omanhene, represen-tatives and chiefs from throughout the federation.

Being inland, the Asante were not as directlyaffected by British living among them as were thecoastal peoples, but they were certainly indirectlyaffected by their own involvement in the slave trade(both selling and buying; some scholars have attrib-uted Asante power and wealth to their wide use ofslave labor) and also by the influx of European goodsthroughout the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries.However, the first British to actually visit Kumasi wereThomas Bowdich and a British merchant-governor,John Smith. Bowdich was impressed by the Asanteand their capital and wrote glowingly of the broadclean streets and the splendor of the royal palaceand the Asantehene’s entourage. Nevertheless, theAsantehene, Osei Bonsu, rejected the idea of a residentBritish governor or missionaries. Smith’s successor,Charles McCarthy, and the next Asantehene, Osei Yaw,developed a far more militant relationship, resultingin 5 years of war, but the following British merchant-governor, George Maclean, again initiated a period ofpeaceful diplomacy, trade, and mutual respect.

The Dutch eventually left Cape Coast, amid someforged documents regarding the rights to Elmina, andthe British, under the particularly racist GarnetWolseley, established occupation of the coast anddecided to invade Kumasi. The Asantehene, KofiKakari, wanted to take the war to the coast, ratherthan risk destruction of Kumasi, but the QueenMother and many of the inner council advised peace.When Wolseley eventually demanded a payment of$6 million worth of gold plus the imprisonment ofthe Queen Mother and several others as hostages, the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE 285

Asantes could not avoid war, but they were soundlydefeated, and Wolseley’s army marched into Kumasi,looting and torching the entire city and the royalpalace. When the Asantehene finally agreed to theBritish demand for gold, the shocked populationdemanded his resignation. With British encourage-ment, there were several attempted coups in Kumasi,and rivalries developed among the various states. By1885, the Asante confederacy was a shambles, andonly slowly rebuilt after 1894 by Osei AgyemanPrempeh I, perhaps aided by the introduction ofrubber and cocoa production.

Despite Prempeh’s promises to accept a residentBritish governor in Kumasi and to submit to Britishauthority, the British were determined to invade. InJanuary of 1896, the British military marched intoKumasi and took captive the Asantehene, AgyemanPrempeh, the Queen Mother, and several other offi-cials. They were imprisoned first at Elmina, then toSierra Leone, and eventually to the Seychelles, wherePrempeh stayed until 1924. The Golden Stool, how-ever, had been carefully hidden and thus escaped thelooting and destruction by the British soldiers thatfollowed. British companies poured into the Asanteregion to mine gold and to extract lumber and rub-ber, all with the use of forced labor. When the Britishgovernor, Frederick Hodgson, finally visited Kumasiand demanded that the Golden Stool be brought outof hiding and that he be seated upon it, the Asanteshad had enough. They began preparing for war atthe urging of Yaa Asantewaa, the Queen Mother ofEdweso. Although the Asante managed to imprisonthe British for quite some time in their own fort inKumasi, British forces from the coast eventuallyretook the fort and destroyed Kumasi once again.Still, the Golden Stool remained unharmed.

There followed a time of relative peace, and even-tually, in 1924, Prempeh I was returned to Kumasi, atfirst only as an ordinary citizen but ultimately rulingAsante until his death. His successor, Nana OseiAgyeman Prempeh II, was enstooled in 1935 andreigned until 1970, his funeral celebrated in the docu-mentary film A Great Tree Has Fallen, by Roy Sieber.He was succeeded by Opoku Ware II, who reigneduntil his death in 1999, when the current Asantehene,Otumfuo Osei Tutu II, was enstooled.

Queen mothers, queen sisters, and other women inthis matrilineal society have always had importantroles in Asante politics, including specific offices in theroyal court and the right to nominate the successor to

the king. Other women, such as wives and consorts ofthe king and other ambitious women, have acted asadvisors to the king and are expected to speak out intimes of crisis or dissent.

The role of okyeame, sometimes translated as“linguist,” is also very important and carries muchpower. His task is more to present an artistic interpre-tation of the chief ’s speech, and thus he can insert hisown ideas and thoughts into his elaborations. Evenbeyond that, in speaking on behalf of the king, he cantake liberties in guiding discussion. The Akan preferindirectness in speech and thus avoid face-to-faceencounters across social class lines, particularly ininteraction with a chief. Consequently, the okyeame isoften interpreting for both parties. He also oftenserves as a chief ’s advisor and sometimes as a prose-cutor or lawyer.

Economics

Traditional Asante economics have been based onthree sources: farming, marketing, and craft produc-tion. Although these have shifted somewhat overtime, all three remain important today. Subsistenceswidden horticulture has been the mainstay of theAsante economy for many hundreds of years. Themajor staples are yams of various kinds, cocoyams,maize, cassava (manioc), oil palm, and plantains; andbananas, oranges, pineapples, beans, onions, toma-toes, okra, egusi, peppers, groundnuts, sweet pota-toes, and many other fruits, vegetables, herbs, andmedicinal plants are grown widely. Since about 1900,cocoa has become the major export crop.

Many of these crops are interplanted, so that anoutsider will not readily recognize an Asante farm.This promotes a balanced use of soil nutrients andallows tall plants, such as plantains, to shelter smaller,younger plants from the blazing sun and poundingrain. Most families have at least two plots of land, sothat some can lie fallow while another is under culti-vation. Nevertheless, the land is rich enough thatfallow periods need not be long, and villages aretherefore permanent. The traditional iron macheteand short-handled hoe remain the major farm imple-ments, though today they are seldom locally forged.Fishing has also long been important, and fresh anddried fish are a major source of protein. Goats, sheep,chickens, and guineas are also raised; cattle are rarebecause of tsetse. Traditionally, women did most ofthe farmwork; men helped clear land, but women did

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE286

the planting, weeding, harvesting, and transporting.Still today, most women are farmers, but they alsoinvolve themselves in other enterprises, such as craftsor marketing, if they possibly can.

Asante markets are among the largest and mostcolorful in Africa, and many Asante also engage inlong-distance trade. Although women have tradition-ally been the main farmers in West Africa, Asantewomen also excel as market traders. Most villageshave weekly markets, and towns and cities have dailymarkets that provide occupations for women whohave eschewed farming or who have no access to land.Markets in Asante always have a wealth of fresh fruitsand vegetables for sale, as well as products made fromlocal crops, such as cassava flour and gari, jars of richred-orange palm oil, and jars of hand- or machine-ground nuts. Women also sell live chickens, eggs, andfresh fish; cooked food, such as kenkey and banku,fresh bread, and smoked fish; and packaged foods,which may be Ghanaian made or imported, such ascookies, gum, candy, yogurt, and dried plantain chips.Imported snacks, such as cookies, candy, and chips,have proliferated over the past few years, and alongwith soft drinks, Milo, powdered instant coffee, anddry cereal seem to be the most common foods in citysupermarkets.

Other than food, the most visible products sold atAsante markets are cloth and clothing. Large markets,like Central Market in Kumasi, have lanes and lanesof cloth, locally tie-dyed and batiked, imported laceand synthetic cloth, but mostly the brilliant and infi-nitely patterned manufactured wax prints for whichGhanaians and other West Africans are famous.Traditional kente and adinkara are generally not soldin ordinary markets, but from individual producersin Bonwire, Ntonso, and elsewhere or in specializedcrafts markets catering to tourists and exporters.Manufactured clothing such as men’s slacks andshirts, women’s blouses, underwear, and shoes, bothnew and used, are found in and around large markets.Markets are also a venue for other crafts, such as pot-tery, calabashes, and leather goods, and other produc-tion and services; for example, one can have a shirtmade, a letter typed, or hair braided.

Market selling is hard work. The items women sellare large and heavy for their monetary value, andwomen generally must bring them to market in thedark hours of very early morning. They must sit orstand long hours, sometimes in the baking sun if theyare not rich enough to pay rent on a covered stall.

Sometimes, they have daughters to send out into themarket fringes or lanes to hawk small headloads ofgoods, but they also have infants or toddlers whomust be tended while they work. They must bargainwisely and have good math skills, and they must cal-culate how much they are likely to sell in a day with-out having to haul too much home in the evening.Nevertheless, most women prefer trade to farm labor.It gets them into town where they encounter newproducts and new ideas; it provides them femalecompanions to chat with away from the ears of familymembers; it affords them a freedom of movementand a privacy they are unlikely to have at home intheir village; and it provides an income over whichthey have full control.

Men also participate in the markets, although in aless central way. They are often the means by whichwomen bring goods to market, as haulers of hand-carts and headloads and as drivers of trotros, taxis,and trucks. Traditionally, men sold gold, slaves, kola,and ivory, but these are not major items today. Mendo sell other items in the markets, particularly tradi-tional medicines, beads, fresh meat, metal items, fur-niture and other large wooden items, leather goods,sandals, and all manner of imported goods, such ascassettes, radios, wallets, watches, and new and usedclothing.

A third economic activity very important to theAsante is their craft production. Much of this is forordinary home use, such as axes, hoes, adzes, knives,and machetes; baskets and calabashes for carryingof ordinary goods; pottery for cooking, eating, andwater storage; woodcarving for stools and householdimplements and furniture; and traditionally, barkcloth and simple weaving for ordinary cloth. Otheritems, however, are made for religious, festive, andpolitical purposes, such as kente and adinkra cloths,gold jewelry and ornaments for royalty, drums, cere-monial stools, and the like. As in much of Africa,many crafts are traditionally gender specific. Gold,silver, bronze (or brass), and ironsmithing, as well aswoodcarving, adinkra stamping, and kente weavingare done by men. Pottery is made by women, andwomen do much of the sewing, some contemporarydyeing, and some beadmaking. These and other artswill be discussed below.

The Asante are also active participants in local,regional, and international economic enterprises.Kumasi streets are lined with banks, communica-tions centers, airline offices, restaurants, hotels, travel

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE 287

agencies, and supermarkets, and the Ashanti regionis at the heart of the two major mainstays of theGhanaian economy, gold mining and cocoa produc-tion. Cultural tourism also has the potential tobecome a significant enterprise. Although the coastalcities draw heritage tourists from the United Statesbecause of their slave fortresses, Kumasi is surroundedby villages and towns producing traditional arts, whichhave become emblematic of African culture through-out the diaspora, and those who venture inland toKumasi find artistic vitality and warm hospitality.

Kinship

The Asante, like other Akan peoples, are famously andproudly matrilineal. Although this does not translateto matriarchy, Asante men and women speak openlyof the important roles women play in family life,the economy, and in the political structure, bothpresently and in the past.

The matrilineage has been one of the most impor-tant units of society in Asante, influencing social, reli-gious, and political life. The inheritance of land andother property is traditionally through the matrilin-eal line, from a woman to her brother or sister ordaughter, or from a man to his sister’s sons, as are thedetermination of social and political status. Theabusua, or clan, thus form the core of a village, and itsmembers hold rights to specific offices in village orga-nization. As ancestors are a major focus of religiousbelief, matrilineages also become the locus of reli-gious activity. The matrilineage also provides thefoundation for strong family ties. Everyone remainsclose to their mothers, brothers and sisters are greatconfidants, and men, even when married, retainstrong ties to their natal families and in the past car-ried much responsibility for their sisters and theirsisters’ children.

Matrilineality may sometimes be accompanied bysomewhat more equality for women than is found inpatrilineal societies, and this seems to be true of theAsante. Although men’s and women’s realms are quitedistinct, as is typical in Africa, women are importanteconomically, politically, and religiously. Upon mar-riage, a woman expects to be given land from herhusband’s lineage, and that land is to be used for grow-ing food for the family. However, women also haverights to their own lineage land, the profits of whichare at their own disposal, as are profits from raisingchickens, craft production, and so on. Although today

men are seen as “heads of households” in their conjugalfamilies, mothers are generally closer to their childrenthan are fathers, and mothers’ brothers may still playan important role in the education of their sisters’children. Married women are expected to be faithfulto their husbands, but married men are given consid-erably more leeway. Polygyny is still practiced to someextent, though often unofficially, since it is not seen ascompatible with Christianity or with urban life. Thelaw does not forbid polygyny, but neither does itrecognize it in legal matters. When a husband dies,the wife who has been married legally (with a signedmarriage certificate) is recognized as the inheritor.

Patrilineality also has its place in Asante culture: achild’s spirit comes from the father and his ntoro, anamed patrilineal kin group, although the rites prac-ticed by these groups seem to have waned. In contem-porary society, perhaps because of the British schoolsystem, many or most people carry the surname oftheir father, and today land and material wealth areoften passed along from fathers to their sons anddaughters. It may also be that with increased mobilityand the spreading prevalence of the nuclear family,men’s ties to their matrilineages are becoming lessimportant and less effective than in the past.

Religion and Spiritual Life

Asante traditional religion includes a supreme creator,Nyame or Onyankopon, and a hierarchy of lesser spir-its: atano, abosom, and mmoatia. Nearly all prayersbegin with the invocation of Nyame, and his name isin many proverbs. Today, his name is used constantlywhen people express hopes or aspirations, “If Godwills it,” and in proverbs, which today are used on tex-tiles and pottery, as logos for stores or brands, such asGye Nyame (literally “except God,” but meaning thatnothing can be accomplished without God’s help),and in names of popular restaurants and shops, suchas “God’s Love Refrigeration”or “God’s Grace Fast Foodand Catering.” Asaase Yaa, or Mother Earth, is alsofrequently invoked in prayer and petitions.

The atano and abosom are lesser gods who residein shrines throughout Asante. The shrines usuallyconsist of a brass pan (of European origin) or a claypot containing animal and plant materials and sacri-ficial materials, such as chicken blood and raw eggs,and the pan may rest on its own stool within a shrinehouse or temple or may be placed under or in theforks of a tree. Other items may accumulate in the

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE288

shrine room, such as valuable family possessions orpersonal items of dead priests, and occasionallyakua’ba (see below), but figures are not made of thedeities themselves, nor is figurative art an importantpart of the shrine. A home may have a special shrineroom within the compound, with a white cloth overthe door to warn away menstruating women.

The deities reveal themselves by possessing priestsor priestesses, mediums through which people canapproach the spirits for advice, curing, or other assis-tance. The priests and priestesses live at the fringes ofsociety so that their interaction with supernaturalbeings would not interfere with ordinary people’slives, and they are distinctive in their dress: raffia orwhite cloth skirts, bare feet, and long matted hair(also associated with insane people or, today, drugusers). They also have a small group of followers whofunction as drummers, cooks, and general caretakersof the shrine.

Traditional priests had important and sometimespolitically powerful relationships with chiefs. In somestates, new deities could not be introduced withoutthe approval of the chief, and priests judged to becharlatans could be killed at the command of theAsantehene. Priests and deities were consulted beforemilitary campaigns, often accompanied armies, andwere rewarded with land, captives, and emblems ofroyalty, such as gold and umbrellas. Priests also accom-panied chiefs and others on diplomatic missions.Although traditional priests don’t seem to serve inthis capacity today, some of these important leader-ship roles may be being filled by important Christianreligious leaders, such as Dr. Peter Kwasi Sarpong,the Archbishop of Kumasi and an anthropologist,who wields substantial political and cultural influ-ence today, not just within Ghana but in the interna-tional sphere.

The ancestors are also important and revered, andthey continue to influence life on earth. They are ven-erated, not worshipped, and respond to supplication inthe form of prayer and libation. To become an ances-tor, one must have led an exemplary life and hadchildren, and one must have lived to an old age anddied a natural death, rather than from suicide or cer-tain dread diseases, such as smallpox, AIDS, or insanity.

Most ceremonies call for prayer and libation asmeans to establish a link or communication with God,ancestors, and other spirits. Prayers may include praise,thanks, and petitions for specific personal needsand for general community well-being. Minimally, a

libation may be just a few drops of water or a bit offood dropped on the ground before a meal, but itmight also be any kind of drinkable liquid, such aspalm wine, soda, or schnapps; more substantially, asacrifice may include eggs or chickens, or very rarely,sheep. Apparently, even human sacrifices were madein the past, particularly in situations such as the deathof a chief, who must be accompanied by servants intothe next world. Any adult, man or woman, can offerprayers, libations, or sacrifices, although for majoroccasions, these are led by a chief, a priest, or the headof a household or lineage. Similarly, while simpleprayers and libations may be offered anywhere, majorprayers and sacrifices are made on stools, in shrines,or under sacred trees.

Two ceremonies merit special mention: the Adaeand Odwera. Adae, held every 21 days, celebratesthe ancestors of chiefs and other royalty. The moreserious part of the ceremony is held in the sacredstool house of the palace, where the chief priest offersfood and drinks to each ancestor at his or her stooland asks their blessings for the community, whilethe public gathers outside for music, dancing, andrecitation of the oral history of the royal family.Odwera, an annual celebration perhaps instituted byOsei Tutu I, is celebrated in September for commu-nity purification. Prayers for forgiveness are made,shrines are cleaned and purified, a black hen is sacri-ficed, and the entire community, living and dead,shares a feast to begin the new year cleansed.

Asante religion underwent rapid change in theearly days of colonialism. With the governmentweakened, people turned to new cults, priests, andprotective talismans adopted from neighboringcultures, perhaps as a response to the failed govern-ment of Kofi Kakari, the fall of Kumasi, the exile ofAsantehene Prempeh I, and the eventual annexationof Asante by the British. Some of the new priests hadspiritual powers, which they could place in talismans,or asuman, which can be hung in doorways as pro-tection from theft or wrapped in leather (and some-times gold foil) and sewn on batakari, cotton smocksimported from the north. Although often called“warrior shirts” or “hunter shirts,” as they are believedto protect warriors from injury in battle, they werealso worn by chiefs and even the Asantehene.

Today, most Asantes are Christians, and Sundaymornings find cities and villages filled with congregantsheading to churches of every major and minor Christiandenomination as well as to nondenominational

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE 289

churches. Many are also Muslim, but neither religionnecessarily replaces traditional beliefs. Asante religionhas always been dynamic, as suggested by the influx ofnew deities in the precolonial and early colonialtimes, and it remains so today, so that people may bedevout Catholics in their ordinary thought, speech,and practice and yet may still deeply adhere to thereligious beliefs that are inherent to Asante traditionand culture.

The Life Cycle

Asante life begins with a naming ceremony, whichmarks the beginning of personhood. All Asante andother Akan are named for the day on which they areborn (for example, Kwasi or Akosua for Sunday,Kwabena or Abena for Tuesday, Kofi or Afua forFriday, and so on). The father also chooses a name foran infant, usually the name of someone he wishes tohonor, and on the eighth day, the father’s sisterbestows this name on the child with prayers, askingfor health, wisdom, and a long life and admonishingthe child to be truthful and hardworking. Today,Christian ministers often take over this role. Thenaming ceremony marks entrance into society, andthe child is given a symbol of their gender role in life,for example, a basket for a girl or a machete for a boy.Other names are given that refer to circumstances ofbirth (twins, for example, or birth order) or to eventsoccurring near the time of birth (a festival day, forexample, or a death). Individuals can also add nameslater in life, for example, a person becoming Christianor Moslem may wish to take a name denoting that anew chief can take the stool name of some predeces-sor, and today a woman may take up her husband’ssurname upon marriage.

Puberty rites were celebrated only for girls. Theonset of menstruation was celebrated with a week offeasting, singing, and dancing. The girl was seatedformally in a public place and received gifts from herparents and the community, and the elderly womencounseled her about sexual matters and other wifelyresponsibilities. From this time forward, she wasexpected to spend her menstrual periods in a specialmenstrual house at the fringe of the village and followmany taboos, such as not visiting stool houses, notselling cooked food, and not cooking for herhusband. Both these customs and the nubility cere-mony itself seem to have been discarded, at leastamong more educated families. Girls object to being

publicly displayed with their breasts exposed, but aselsewhere where puberty customs are fading, manyelders feel this has led to promiscuity and adolescentpregnancy. As a consequence, some Christian churcheshave instituted a blessing ceremony for girls, whichmay include Bible lessons, gift giving by their congre-gations, and special blessings and prayers.

Formerly, girls were expected to marry soon afterpuberty, and marriages were and are considered aunion not just of two individuals but also of twofamilies. Cross-cousin marriages were encouraged,parallel-cousin marriages forbidden, and polygynyand the levirate were practiced. Girls could bebetrothed in infancy or even before their birth, andtwin girls were promised to chiefs, but none of theseare common practices today. The marriage ceremonyitself consists of a series of gifts to members of thebride’s family, including money, gold, cloth, underwear,drinks, and, today, a Bible. The first is the “knocking”fee, which is followed by the bride price itself, thenspecial gifts to the bride’s father, her mother, and herbrothers; the women of the family; the girl’s church orhousehold deity; and finally, a special gift to the brideherself, in order to buy items for their married life.Today, many people also have court weddings andChristian church weddings, neither of which permitpolygyny. Church weddings are usually followed by alarge dinner party the next day.

Another religious ceremony practiced by Asante issoul-washing. A person’s soul sometimes needs to bepacified after being offended or following some crisis,such as recovery from a terrible illness or escape froma dangerous accident. The celebrant bathes, cuts andcleans his or her nails, dresses in perfumed whitecloth, sits before a brass pan with water and whiteclay, and with offerings of mashed yam, eggs, andliver from a sheep or fowl, apologizes to the personalspirit, asks forgiveness, and asks for blessings forhimself, his family, and his people. Finally, the cele-brant dips adwera leaves in the clay water and sprin-kles it on the gathered family to show that their soulsare also purified.

Funerals are the most elaborate of Asante cere-monies. Upon death, the in-laws provide itemsneeded for cleansing the body and burial, such assoap, white cloth and clothing, white beads (for awoman), and a pillow and blanket. Traditionally thedead were buried within 3 days of death, thoughtoday bodies may be kept at a mortuary until the timeof the funeral. During the procession to the cemetery,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE290

the widow or widower would be given a clay pot tothrow, indicating that he or she was no longer mar-ried. Neither a widow nor a widower were permittedto sleep alone for 6 weeks, and they followed variousfood restrictions. A widow and her children werelooked after by her husband’s successor for a year; atthe end of the year, she could choose to marry himand remain with the family or she was also free tomarry someone else. A widower was free to marry atthe end of the 6-week period.

The funeral itself takes place quite some time afterthe death, because the funeral requires much prepara-tion. Palm wine must be gathered, the funeralgrounds prepared, and guests informed. On the dayof the funeral, friends and family members gatherfrom noon on, wearing black or other dark colors.The chief female mourners wear red or red and black.They dance up and down the street or funeralgrounds several times before being seated to receivethe mourners. It is common for there to be hundredsof mourners, and each of them will greet the family(single file, counterclockwise, extending only theright hand, as in all Asante formal greeting). Theywill be offered drinks and will themselves send updonations of money to the family to help defraythe expenses. These gifts are announced, and some-one from the bereaved family will thank the donor.At the climax of the celebration, in-law families ofthe deceased display huge trays of special goods, suchas kente cloth, red-and-black cloth, beads, traditionalsandals, and silk. These trays of goods are danced upto the family with the accompaniment of drummers.Male relatives may be expected to provide a ram,parts of which become food for the ancestors and areburied in the grave and parts of which may be burnedto create soot for the blackening of the deceased’sstool if he or she were an officeholder.

Arts in the Life of Asante

In addition to their intriguing political history, theAsante are also celebrated for the splendor and vari-ety of their arts, many of which are becoming popularin the diaspora even as their traditional religiousimportance may sometimes seem to be diminishing.

As in all West African cultures, the arts serve atleast three overlapping functions: religious, royal, andmundane. Religious arts include shrine houses, shrinefigures, stools, akua’ba, and funerary items, such asadinkra (or adinkara) cloth. Shrine figures are rarely

seen by outsiders today, except in museums, asshrines themselves are small and private. A few tradi-tional shrines have been preserved by the governmentand have been rebuilt according to old drawings andphotographs, but most old shrines have fallen intodecay, and newer shrines are small, secluded, and notwelcoming of visitors.

Stools may be ordinary, religious, or political. Atone level, an Asante stool is simply something thata person sits upon and is especially brought out forelders or guests. Such stools have small lugs at thesides for easy carrying, and people can carry theirstools along when visiting nearby. This mundane use,however, is being replaced by the ubiquitous plasticstacking chair in villages near cities. Stools have arectangular base and a rectangular seat curving up atthe sides. The important design is in the center, andit may be a carved geometric symbol, an animal, or asimple design.

The akua’ba (Wednesday’s child) may also be con-sidered a religious item, as its original purpose was toappeal to the deities to promote pregnancy in thewoman who is carrying it. The story is that there wasa woman, Akua, who badly wanted a child, as do allAkan women. A priest instructed her to have a smallimage carved and to carry that image and care for itas she would a child. Akua did so and, despite teasing,became pregnant. Today, many women still use thefigure, sometimes adorned with beads and earrings,either to cure barrenness or to ensure the safe birth,health, and beauty of the child. Akua’ba are alsosometimes used as shrine figures or as memorials fora dead child. Typically, the akua’ba has a flat disk-shaped head, arched eyebrows, small facial features, aringed neck, a small cylindrical body with tiny breastsand navel, and short, plain, horizontal arms. In thepast, terra-cotta figures and heads of both male andfemale royalty were used for funeral purposes (notburial), but these do not seem to be made any longer.

Adinkra cloth is visible at any festival and hasbecome popularized in the West, perhaps because ofthe appeal of the symbols. Traditional black adinkracloth is still made by dyeing the cloth with wood andthen inking it with small stamps carved from calabashshells. The black cloth is spread on a board anddivided into sections with a four- to six-toothedcomb dipped in ink. Each section is then stampedwith a single design, but the sections may all have thesame design, or the designs may vary from section tosection. These designs, used in other Asante arts and

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE 291

especially popular now on factory cloth and flowerpots,for business signs and stationery, generally representproverbs, such as “Look back to your ancestors”(Sankofa) or “Two brothers should not argue overfood” (two crocodiles crossed, sharing the same stom-ach). These proverbs, as symbols or words, appearin many other Asante arts. While all black or black-and-red cloth is used for most funerals, white clothwith black designs may be used for festive occasionsand for funerals of elders.

One must also acknowledge the adaptation oftraditional art forms to Christian contexts. Churchesare decorated with traditional Asante symbols andcloth, and people wear kente and adinkra cloth tochurch. Dr. Peter Sarpong has been a powerful advo-cate for traditional arts and culture and a pioneer inintegrating traditional music, dance, and libation intoCatholic life, ceremony, and worship.

All African kingdoms and states have engaged thearts for political purposes, but the Asante haveexcelled in the variety and high visibility of their royalarts. The Golden Stool, discussed above, is certainlythe most revered aesthetic symbol of the Asantenation, but there are many other emblems of state inAsante, both of The State and of the member states ofthe Asante federation. Every chief and high-rankingofficial has a ceremonial stool of carved wood embell-ished with silver and gold, bells, amulets, and some-times a central gold or silver “soul disk.” The basicdesigns of ceremonial stools carry messages, whichmay be particular to the chief or chiefdom or mayhave broader use. For example, a circular shape, the“circular rainbow,” represents the unity of all Asantepeoples under the Asantehene; the “wisdom knot”indicates that the chief will rule through wisdomrather than force; and a two-level design indicatesvariously that a paramount chief has authority overother chiefs or that chiefly power rests upon thepower of the people’s will.

In addition to royal stools, chiefs at various levelscarry state swords and flywhisks, appear under ornatecloth umbrellas and large fans, may be carried inpalanquins, are accompanied by linguists (okyeame)carrying staffs topped with golden emblems, wearkente cloth, sandals, and crowns with golden orna-ments and a prodigious amount of gold jewelry. TheAsantehene is said to wear so many gold bracelets thathe cannot lift his arms and so must be accompaniedby aides on each side carrying his arms. All of theseitems are not only splendid in themselves—the glitter

of the gold and the brilliant colors and patterns ofkente cloth—but all of them bear symbols that areimmediately recognizable to every citizen. The sym-bols may be simple human or animal figures, such ascrossed crocodiles, or may be geometric, but they rep-resent proverbs and other words of wisdom relatingto the behavior of the chief or the citizenry. All ofthese arts are made by specialists, and all of them aremen who generally inherit the right and the trainingmatrilineally.

Each of these arts is worthy of an entry in itself, butkente cloth may be the most familiar to Westernersand has indeed been the subject of much research byartists and anthropologists. The origins of kente areobscured in distant history, but one legend is thatmen were taught to weave by Ananse the spider, a cul-ture hero who is probably the ancestor of America’sBr’er Rabbit. Kente is a very complex and tightlywoven fabric made on a typical West African men’snarrow horizontal loom. Early cloths were of indigoand white cotton, but imported silks and eventuallyrayon in every color have been incorporated and arenow considered traditional. Each 4”-wide kente stripconsists of a series of patterns, each usually about 3”to 4” long, and usually, today, alternating. When manydozens of these strips are sewn together at the sel-vages, the effect is a checkerboard of patterns, withthe ends usually having more and perhaps more com-plex designs. Each color carries meaning, and each ofhundreds of individual patterns also has meanings,often relating to proverbs or having other politicalreferences. Even the way the wearer wraps the clotharound his body carries meaning, such as humility orarrogance or the bearing of a gift. In earlier times,chiefs and kings reserved certain patterns for theirown use, and indeed kente was used only by royals orgiven by them as gifts. Today, however, most peoplewho can afford to purchase a cloth do, and wear themfor special occasions, such as religious festivals, wed-dings, or simply fancy parties. To the chagrin of manyelders, kente strips are now exported to decorateAmerican graduation robes or baseball caps, andkente-like designs are machine printed on cheapcommercial cloth and made into bags, shirts, andother tourist items.

Perhaps no arts can properly be called “ordinary,”but the Asante make many arts or crafts for every dayuse. Women make pottery in a huge variety of shapesfor various purposes, such as grinding spices, carry-ing and storing water, and steaming gari, as well as

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASANTE292

for cooking and eating. Many villages still fire pots onopen wood fires, but others use charcoal-fired kilnsinstead of or in addition to them. Men carve woodendrums, thumb pianos, and other instruments; bowlsand tool handles; and a multitude of tourist items,such as awari games, inventive nontraditional masks,and salad bowls. Tie-dye and batik, using beeswaxand candle stubs, hand-carved wooden or foamstamps, and commercial dyes have become populararts encouraged by government and nongovernmen-tal agencies, and people in remote villages wear andsell beautiful hand-dyed fabric.

Bronze and brass, generally cast but also ham-mered, were traditionally used for forowa and kuduo,containers used for gold dust, money, pomades, andother valuables and also, famously, for “gold-weights,”tiny figures and symbols made of brass but used toweigh gold. Today, these weights have evolved into avariety of objects, such as hollow beads modeled afterearlier gold beads worn by chiefs, bracelets, pendants,bottle openers, nativity scenes, and sometimes quiteremarkable sculpture. These items are made by lost-wax casting, a process that can take many days, as theitem is first modeled of beeswax, and then an investi-ture must be built up of many layers, first of a char-coal slip and then of clay mixed with palm nut fiber.When the mold is finally dry, the firing is done on anopen-air “kiln” enclosed only on three sides, and themold must be shattered to remove the cast piece, sothat each piece is unique. Like other metal arts inAfrica and the world, bronze casting has been tradi-tionally restricted to men, though there is at least oneyoung woman presently casting.

Bead making is another art elevated in recent yearsto great popularity, both for local use and for broadexport. Although most “African trade beads” wereactually Italian imports (such as the millefiori beadsfrom Murano), Asantes today pulverize old bottleglass, color it with dyes, and bake it in molds to pro-duce beads of many shapes, colors, and patterns.Traditionally and still used as waist beads by womenand seen only by their husbands, these beads havecaught the fancy of Westerners and are now soldwidely, strung on raffia or cotton string, at beadmarkets in Kumasi, Koforidua, and Accra.

Asante dancing and music, particularly drum-ming, are other ancient arts that remain populartoday in both traditional and contemporary settingsas well as in the diaspora. The same drums played intraditional villages for ceremonies are now found in

Christian churches and at national political events,and young people learn traditional dancing in schoolsand universities. Highlife (or earlier, “palm wine gui-tar”) music, which had its origin in late 19th-centuryGhana, and is sometimes considered a form of jazz,became enormously popular throughout urban WestAfrica in the 1920s into the 1970s, and it remainsinfluential in the 21st century in forms such as hip-hop and reggae.

With their wealth of art forms, it may be surpris-ing that the Asante have no history of mask making,even though many of their close neighbors makethem and perhaps especially since their very closerelatives, the Baoulé in Côte d’Ivoire, are renownedfor the beauty and variety of their mask forms. Itmay be that in Asante, masks were avoided becausemasked figures could have been viewed as discordantwith the power and prestige of royalty, or that thepriests and priestesses were so powerful that deitiesdid not need masked impersonators, or that theAsante lacked the initiation societies and secretsocieties that so often use masks and masquerades inother African cultures.

The Asante have entered the 21st century a proudand flourishing people. They have maintained manyof their traditional beliefs and values, and they areproud of their rich history. Though they sufferedunder the years of colonialism, they emerged at theheart of the nation that led Africa into independence.Their magnificent arts, sought by collectors andmajor museums the world over, have become sym-bols of the nation of Ghana and sometimes as sym-bols of unity for diasporic Africans everywhere. Theirwarm hospitality, their proud history, their flourish-ing arts, and the economic and political stability ofthe region are beacons to business people, visitors,and scholars from around the world.

— Mary Carol Hopkins

See also African Thinkers; African Thought

Further Readings

Adler, P., & Barnard, N. (1992). African majesty: Thetextile art of the Ashanti and Ewe. London: Thames& Hudson.

Allman, J., & Victoria Tashjian, V. (2000). “I will noteat stone”: A women’s history of colonial Asante.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ASSIMIL ATION 293

Berry, S. S. (2000). Chiefs know their boundaries:Essays on property, power, and the past in Asante,1896–1996.

Kwadwo, O. (2002). A handbook on Asante culture.Kumasi, Ghana: Cita Press.

McCaskie, T. C. (2000). Asante identities: History andmodernity in an African village, 1850–1950.Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Mendonsa, E. L. (2002). West Africa: An introductionto its history, civilization, and contemporarysituation. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press.

Yankah, K. (1995). Speaking for the chief: Okyeame andthe politics of Akan royal oratory. Bloomington, IN:Indiana University Press.

4 ASSIMILATION

Assimilation refers to that result of culture changewhereby the members of one society modify theirbehavior and values to become very similar to, or iden-tical with, those of another society possessing a differ-ent culture. It is to be distinguished from the potentiallyrapid processes of culture change due to internal inno-vation and invention and external borrowing throughintermittent diffusion of culture elements from outsidethe society, and the very gradual process by the absenceof exact replication by a younger generation of thebeliefs and behavior of an older generation. Innovationand diffusion are ongoing features of human life, andtheir effects are usually gradual (over many genera-tions), limited to distinct subsets of a cultural system,and, more important, typically greatly modified in turnto mesh with the existing culture.

The process of change giving rise to assimilation,however, is acculturation. Acculturation is the com-plex and dynamic set of processes resulting fromclose, prolonged contact between two societies, one ofthem dominant. This imbalance of power is necessaryfor assimilative change, since the drastic and totalcharacter of assimilation requires that the dominantsociety monopolize prestige, resources, and force andpossess an ideology that rewards and/or demandscorresponding change in the subordinate society.There are modifications to both societies in the accul-turative situation, the dominant as well as the sub-ordinate. While there have been many studies ofcontributions by conquered societies to Western

cultures during the extent of European conquest andcolonial control (in particular new domesticates), thefocus in anthropology has been on what occurs in thesubordinate group. Other than physical extinction,assimilation is an extreme result because it consists ofa total process of adjustment whereby the subordi-nate group abandons its cultural forms by adoptingthose of the dominant society. Assimilation is culturalextinction—language, kinship and family organization,ethos, aesthetics, community organization, religion,technology, and systems of leadership and authoritydisappear to be replaced by the corresponding cultureelements of the dominant society.

Assimilation is a theoretical end point along a con-tinuum of reactions to acculturation. Often, the termis used to refer to a process that is incomplete, forexample, “Society B is assimilating,” or “The “elites ofsociety B are highly assimilated.” It is not irreversible,or even unidirectional. Cultural modifications mayoccur that suggest that a particular society is under-going this kind of modification only to have it termi-nated in a nativistic movement. It is, in fact, oftendifficult to determine whether a society is proceedingthrough assimilation or achieving a dynamic balanceof culture traits from the dominant culture and tradi-tional traits from the subordinate culture.

Several questions can be developed employing aprocess model: How long is the assimilation process?Assimilation studies have been a staple of sociologicalapproaches toward the immigrant experience inAmerica, with a time span of three generations suchthat grandchildren have acquired the dominant cul-ture while their grandparents have not. MargaretMead’s description of the change in Manus society(Admiralty Islands) from a “Stone Age” culture tomodernity occurred within a generation. Traditionalchildren she had known in 1928 had apparently in1953 become Westernized, valuing and practicingWestern forms of marriage, government, and reli-gion. Intragenerational transformation would seemprobable for individuals, but it would be more likelythat societal assimilation would not be complete untilmembers of older generations had passed away.

What drives assimilation? One popularized expla-nation, especially for the dominant culture (and oftenadopted by the assimilating subordinate culture), isthat the dominant culture is absolutely superiorand thus overwhelmingly compelling and attractive.Mead’s account of Manus assimilation attributed therapidity of the transformation to the much greater

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ATAPUERCA294

effectiveness of Western political and social forms andthe consequent laudable desire by Manus to emulatethese. However, it is more likely that the realitiesof the acculturative setting, with the presence ofenforced planned changes (or at least planned prohi-bitions of traditional ways) by the dominant culture,present subordinate peoples with few choices otherthan attempts at assimilation. Other strategies toacculturation, such as biculturalism or marginality,active revitalization, and nativism may not be suc-cessful. Contrary to a view of subordinate societies aspassive victims, anthropologists have usually soughtto show that members of subordinate societies havebeen creative opportunists, actively taking charge oftheir own response to acculturation, including theadoption of the dominant culture. However, a dis-tinction may be made between internal and externalassimilation. Internal is an ideological transformationinvolving the adoption of the values, beliefs, andworldview of the dominant culture, while externalinvolves the manifestations of the dominant culture:clothing, dwellings, work schedules, farming prac-tices, and so on. It is difficult to consider that thesecould be mutually distinct and unrelated processes.The dominant culture typically enforces only externalassimilation. Moreover, people’s responses in changeoften are focused on items of material culture thateither show promise of material advantage or areviewed as observable markers of prestige. Still, it is thepurposeful interest in acquiring ideology, values, andbeliefs that drives continuing assimilation, and conse-quently most studies explaining people’s interest inassimilation have looked at such ideological arenas asreligious conversion and education.

What is the result? The end product of assimilationwould be members of the former subordinate societymerging with and becoming indistinguishable frommembers of the dominant society. However, there isthe issue of acceptance by the dominant society, espe-cially when physiological attributes are used to rejectformer members of the subordinate society regardlessof their capability at assimilation. This rejection hasbecome a source of much concern in Western socialscience, for example, in the study of racism. ManyAmerican social scientists have looked at assimilationmuch more favorably than anthropology has. Theyview the immigrant experience in America as one inwhich successful assimilation was desirable, andtherefore it was important to determine those socialfactors that enable it. Anthropology, on the other

hand, views it as destructive (especially in regard toNative Americans) and therefore sought to determinethose social factors that held it in check and wouldenable non-Western groups to maintain their owndistinctive cultures and languages.

— John Rhoades

See also Migrations; Social Change

Further Readings

Mead, M. (1956). New lives for old: Culturaltransformation–Manus, 1928–1953. New York:Morrow.

Simpson, G. E. (1968). Assimilation. In D. Sills (Ed.),International encyclopedia of the social sciences(pp. 438–444). New York: Macmillan.

4 ATAPUERCA

Atapuerca is a World Heritage Site located in Burgosprovince, Spain. The construction of a railroad at theend of the 19th century, cutting through the foothillsof the Sierra de Atapuerca, led to the discovery ofseveral hominid sites. In 1910, the archaeologist JesúsCarballo discovered the Bronze Age site and paintingsin the Cueva Mayor, known as the Portalón. In 1964and 1966, Francisco Jordá carried out excavations,which led to the first estimation of the antiquity ofthe sites in the Trinchera. Based on the faunal analysisdone by Juan F. Villalta, an age of 500,000 years agowas estimated. In 1976, Trinidad Torres undertook anexcavation and entered in the Sima de los Huesos insearch of bear remains. Among the bones removedwere human fossils: mandible, teeth, and cranial frag-ments. Torres took the human fossils to his doctoraladvisor, the paleontologist Emiliano Aguirre, andbased on the bears’ remains placed the site within theMiddle Pleistocene.

Due to the importance of the human remains,Aguirre organized a multidisciplinary group to exca-vate the main sites, and after he retired, the studieswere codirected by Juan L. Arsuaga, José M.Bermúdez de Castro, and Eudald Carbonell. Since1978, very relevant human remains have been foundby this multidisciplinary group in the main sites:Trinchera Dolina, Trinchera Galería, Sima de los

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ATAPUERCA 295

Huesos, Portalón de Cueva Mayor, Trinchera Elefante,and Mirador.

Trinchera Dolina excavations in 1990 yielded a lotof vertebrate bones and in 1993 intensive excavationsbegan of an area of 6 sq m. In 1994, several humanfossils were discovered: a handful of upper and lowerteeth, a large cranial fragment, and a mandible with amolar wisdom tooth in the process of erupting.Furthermore, 36 human fragments were recovered ofat least six individuals. Based on micromammals andmagnetostratigraphy, the level was dated of 780,000years ago. In 1997, a new human species was defined:Homo antecessor, the species that discovered Europe.

Sima de los Huesos is the other most important siteof Atapuerca. It is a small cavity at the end of a ramp,which is accessed by a 13-meter vertical shaft, after tra-versing half a kilometer of difficult passages from thecurrent entrance to Cueva Mayor. The Sima de losHuesos is one of the most productive paleanthropolog-ical sites in the world. Since 1987, at least 28 differentindividuals had been identified as Homo heidelber-gensis. Several very well preserved and almost completecraniums, mandibles, pelvises, femurs, hands, and feethave a mixture of ancient and modern characteristics.

Some are similar to their Neandertal descendants andothers to their ancestors the first Europeans.

— Eustoquio Molina

See also Arsuaga, J. L.; Bermúdez de Castro, J. M.; HomoAntecessor; Orce; Paleoanthropology

Further Readings

Arsuaga, J. L., Martínez, I., Gracia, A., Carretero, J. M.,& Carbonell, E. (1993). Three new human skullsfrom the Sima de los Huesos Middle Pleistocenesite in Sierra de Atapuerca, Spain. Nature, 362,534–537.

Bermúdez de Castro, J. M., Arsuaga, J. L., Carbonell, E.,Rosas, A., Martínez, I., & Mosquera, M. (1997). Ahominid from the Lower Pleistocene of Atapuerca,Spain: Possible ancestor to Neandertals andmodern humans. Science, 276, 1392–1395.

Carbonell, E., Bermúdez de Castro, J. M., Arsuaga,J. L., Díez, J. C., Rosas, A., Cuenca-Bescós, G., Sala,R., et al. (1995). Lower Pleistocene Hominids andartifacts from Atapuerca-TD6 (Spain). Science,269, 826–830.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ATHABASCAN296

4 ATHABASCAN

It is theorized the Athabascan were the last NativeAmerican group to cross Beringia 10,000 years ago.Their territory (after crossing Beringia) would havestarted in the subarctic terrain from the Yukon orinterior of Alaska, to northwestern Canada. Thesesturdy peoples of the North not only survived thetundra and nomadic lifestyle of Athabascan antiquity,following the caribou and other game, but expandedand became many nations. The three main subfami-lies are the Northern Athabascan, Pacific Athabascan,and Apachean.

The name Athabascan evolved from the Cree wordAthapuscow, meaning “There are reeds one afteranother” or “a place where there is grass everywhere,”and originated from the Peace-Athabasca Delta inCanada. Athabascan has several other spellings;Athapaskan, Athapascan, and Athabaskan. Thesepeople have descended from the Na-Dene, the largestphylum of North America, from which the Tlingit andEyak are also distantly related. Dene is an Athabascanword for “the people,” and the Chipewyan and Navajogroups also call themselves the “Dene.”

Glass beads received in trade in exchange for furpelts became much treasured by the AthabascanPeople, who expressed great artistry and ingenuity in

dramatically transforming the appearance of theirclothing and accessories with beautiful floral andtotemic patterns. Products made with beads becameinstantly popular trade and tourist items.

Lifestyles

When traveling, the Athabascan constructed tempo-rary conical dwellings; they covered the structureof leaning poles with bark, brush, or hides. Their per-manent habitation consisted of semi-subterraneandwellings. Birch bark served as a durable and ever-available raw material to form and create essential bas-kets for carrying and cooking (for example, boilingmeat in water with hot stones) and especially for craft-ing canoes. There were two sizes of sleds used by thenorthern Athabascan people, the larger to transportheavy loads and the smaller for personal use. Clothingand accessories (including knives and arrow sheaths)were adorned with porcupine quillwork, especially themen’s clothing. Quillwork was a time-consuming pro-ject, requiring hunting of the animal, careful removaland preparation of the quills, and the difficult sewingrequired to stitch through the thick moose hides,transforming them into works of art with elaborateand intricate floral and woodland motifs.

The potlatch was actively practiced and was a cen-tral societal theme for the Athabascan People. Surplus

foods were stored in familycaches and birch barkboxes for the various win-ter feasts, taking place fromlate fall to early spring. Thiswas the season to put loveinto action, as William E.Simeone was told concern-ing the northern Athabascanpotlatches. For instance,to give a blanket was to“wrap them in love.” TheAthabascan did not holdcompetitive potlatches tothe extent practiced bysome of the coastal tribes,such as the Haida andKwakiutls. As with othernorthwest coastal tribes, itwas important for a chief toknow his connections to allof the attendants of the

Salmon catch on the Kuskokwim River

Source: Photograph by Rachel Klein, the Kuskokwim Corporation.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ATHABASCAN 297

potlatch, to what capacity they would participate,and how they would be either assisted or honored.Potlatches were also times for unmarried clanmembers to meet other available persons. Since theAthabascan are a matriarchal people, who follow theirmother’s moiety, it was important for all Athabascanto know the other clan members’ moiety, and howthey were derived. The Upper Tanana, for instance,have two moieties. The first are the Crow People,or Star People, or the Ones Who Came from the Sky.The second moiety is the Seagull People. It was strictlyforbidden for the Upper Tanana to marry within thesame moiety.

From the very antiquity of Athabascan people,feasts were held after a successful hunt, especially withbear or caribou. Spiritual observances within a moraluniverse belief are demonstrated by showing respectfor all things, for each other, for all animals, and forall plants, truly a kinship with all life. There werestrict ceremonial practices followed for disposing ofanimal remains, for example, among the KoyukonAthabascan People in Alaska, who lived in close prox-imity to the Inupiat, their dwellings and lifestyleswere very similar; yet archeologists could decipherwhich cultural group resided there based on thecontents of the excavated kitchen midden. If therewere remains of an animal the Koyukon held sacredeither within or near the dwelling then it was anInupiat lodge. The Koyukon would return the bonesof water creatures to the water, in contrast, to indis-criminately dispose of the fauna. In the videos ofMake Prayers to the Raven, an elder wonders if the“bad luck” they were experiencing that day was due togoing away from the rules (respect for all that is) from“a distant time.”

Strict etiquette was observed for bear meat. Thewomen were not allowed to eat certain parts of bearmeat until after entering menopause; it was alsostated in Make Prayers to the Raven that the Koyukonwomen had not seen certain parts of that video (thewomen do not attend the “Bear Feast” in the woods).Other restrictions observed were that only men couldcook it, certain parts could not be eaten or even givento dogs, and the “best parts” were to be saved andserved as an integral part of the spiritual aspects ofthe potlatch.

As the Athabascan integrated into other surround-ing Native groups, there would be a blending of cul-tures and even mythology. The Athabascan situatedclose to the Tlingits have nearly identical stories yet

different hero names; for example, the Tlingitshave “Raven,” and the Athabascan have “Crow.”These similarities are very evident in the stories ofRaven/Crow and Whale and Raven/Crow and BrownBear. There are also parallels between the two culturalgroups in the stories of Land Otter Men, or Kush-da-ka, as the Tlingits call them. These creaturestransform themselves from land otters into men totrick humans to come to live with them and arestill believed to exist by the traditional Tlingits.

One-Who-Was-Saved-By-The-Land-Otter totem in Klawock,

Alaska. The land otters on various places of the body, represent

the person turning into a land otter

Source: Photograph by Pamela Rae Huteson.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

ATHABASCAN298

Divisions

The Northern Athabascan in the Alaskan/Canadianregions was to be divided into approximately 27language groups. However, due to the intricacyand multifaceted nature of the Athabascan language,it is still being subdivided. It was thought the Eyakalso separated from the Athabascan, but through lin-guistic research, it has been fairly well established thatthey separated prior to the proto-Athabascan.

Northern Athabascan:

• Alaska: Koyukon, Tanana, Ahtena, Tanaina, UpperKuskokwim, Holikachuk, Ingalik, and Tanacross

• Northeastern Alaska and Northwestern Canada: Han(Moosehide), and Gwich’in

• Canada: Northern Tutchone, Southern Tutchone,Tagish, Tahltan, Kaska, Mountain, Bear Lake, Dogrib,Yellowknife, Sekani, Carrier, Chilcotin, Nicola, Sarsi,Slave Lake, Beaver, and Kawchottine (Hare)

Around 1,600 years ago, a portion of the Athabascanpeople migrated from the north to colonize thePacific Northwest and northern California regionsand became the Pacific Athabascan.

Pacific Athabascan:

• Oregon: Coquille• Oregon and California: Upper Umpqua, Tututni-

Shasta Costa, Galice-Applegate and Cheto-Tolowa• California: Hupa, Mattole, Sinkyone-Wailaki, and Cah

Six to seven hundred years ago, the Pre-Apacheangroup journeyed to Southwest America, to the regionsof New Mexico and Arizona, where their culture andtechnical survival skills morphed and integrated withthe local residents, to become the Apaches and Navajo(Dineh). This division of the Athabascan kept a “coretrait” of the conical dwellings and created severalstyles of the hogan.

Apachean:

• Puebloan: Apache (Western), Chiricahua, Jicarilla,Mescalero, and Navajo (Dineh)

• Plains: Apache (Kiowa) and Lipan

European Introductions

Prior to European contact, the Athabascan hadsettled into a seminomadic lifestyle. They were alreadytraders by occupation and were ready for fur trade

with the Europeans. Bead-work taught to the easternAthabascan spread quicklyto the west and south, aseach band created their ownsignificant style. Althoughquillwork was still crafted,the beads were easy toobtain in any array of sizesand colors, which madethem an instant favoritewith Athabascan artisans.The legacy of Athabascanbeadwork can be found inmany major museumsaround the world.

Present Day

Much work is being doneto save the Athabascan lan-guage; for example, everyspring, an Athabascan Con-ference is held in a dif-ferent Athabascan area,

Ollie Peterson and Glenn (Tiny) Fredricks cutting salmon in traditional manner, for winter

provisions

Source: Photograph by Rachel Klein, the Kuskokwim Corporation.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUEL, JEAN MARIE (1936–) 299

where linguists and other educators meet with theAthabascan communities to discuss ways to preservetheir valuable language. Many curriculums havebeen developed to instruct school students andadults how to carry on their traditional Athabascancultural heritage. Athabascan authors are alsomaking themselves known in the literary world, forexample, Velma Wallis, author of Two Old Women(1993), and Jan Harper-Haines, author of Cold RiverSpirits (2000).

Today’s Athabascan have integrated modern tech-nology and traditional subsistence; the CoquillePeople are raising and marketing organic cranber-ries, and Alaskan Athabascan are participating inthe Alaskan fishing industry. Also, building on gam-bling “games,” casinos have also become a way forsome Athabascan groups to become self-sufficient.The Athabascan may be a diverse group, but thereis a bond that goes very deep, as historically, theyhave assisted each other in various territorial dis-putes with other encroaching Native groups, forexample. Today, they continue to assist each other topreserve their language and culture, by keeping itviable and relevant for the present and future usefor not only their families, but for the family of manas a whole.

— Pamela Rae Huteson

See also Aleuts; Native Peoples of the United States

Further Readings

Clark, A. M. (1996). Who lived in this house?A study of Koyukuk River semi subterraneanhouses. Hull, Quebec: Canadian Museum ofCivilization.

Ives, John W. (1990). A theory of NorthernAthapaskan prehistory. Boulder, CO: WestviewPress; Calgary: University of CalgaryPress.

Nelson, R., & Badger, M. O. (1987). Make prayersto the raven. [Video recording]. Fairbanks:KUAC. (Produced in collaboration with the peopleof the Koyukuk River, KUAC-TV, University ofAlaska)

Simeone, W. E. (1995). Rifles, blankets, and beads:Identity, history, and the Northern Athapaskanpotlatch. Norman, OK: University of OklahomaPress.

4 AUEL, JEAN MARIE (1936–)

Jean Marie Auel, born on February 18, 1936, inChicago, Illinois, is the author of the series, Earth’sChildren, a collection of novels revolving around theinteractions of Cro-Magnon people with Neandertals.Auel did not come to her chosen craft as a trainedwriter. Rather, after raising five children and earningan MBA from the University of Portland, she wasin a self-described “free-floating state” that left heropen to new ideas: She was drawn ultimately to writ-ing the stories of Ice Age ancestors that modernscience helped her tell. Auel joins the ranks of writerslike J.R.R. Tolkien and J. K. Rowling, who have writtenepic stories drenched in fictitious history and findlarge audiences due to their works’ imaginative andhistorical values. While Tolkien and Rowling focus onthe magical, Auel’s books draw their richness from herstudy and explorations of the worlds of anthropologyand archeology.

Through her fiction, Auel enables readers to discovercultural patterns in ways similar to those of anthropol-ogists in the field. She immersed herself in learningstone tool making, preparing food from caribou brain,processing animal skins, making cordage, and diggingroots to guarantee the authenticity of her books. Sheacknowledges that a bibliography of published mater-ial she has read on archeological and anthropologicalsubjects would approach 4,000 entries. She has estab-lished working relationships with many professionalsand has traveled to Western and Eastern Europe tovisit actual sites and caves to enrich her stories.

Auel uses the Stone Age setting to explore genderroles and draws remarkable parallels between the cavesociety of which she writes and our more contempo-rary social structures. In Auel’s series, the protagonistAyla comes of age in a Neandertal community ruledby traditions and taboos. She is a feminist frommatriarchal prehistory, a resourceful innovator whosesolutions to daily living are a source of astonishmentfor cave men. Ayla’s intelligence separates her fromother tribe members. Auel’s books have also beencommended for the ethnobotanical accuracy as wellas their anthropological accuracy. They remind us totake nothing for granted, such as the bountiful butlimited resources of the earth.

Some historians and anthropologists, however,maintain that Auel’s assumptions about Neandertallife are not realistic. They claim that she bases her

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AURIGNACIAN CULTURE300

view of the Neandertal on the racially motivatedscience of late 19th-century French anthropology,and many anthropologists have denounced the novelsas containing “bad” science and overt racism.

Nonetheless, Auel has received numerous awardsfor her writing, including an American Book Awardnomination for the best first novel and Friends ofLiterature Award for The Clan of the Cave Bear(1981). She is also the recipient of the ScandinavianKaleidoscope of Art Life Award, Golden Plate Award,American Academy of Achievement, Silver TrowelAward, National Zoo Award, Waldo Award (Walden-books), and Persie Award from WIN.

— Judith A. Dompkowski

See also Neandertals

Further Readings

Auel, J. M. (1980). Clan of the cave bear. New York:Crown.

Auel, J. M. (1983). The valley of horses. New York:Crown Publishers.

Auel, J. M. (1985). The mammoth hunters. New York:Crown Publishers.

Auel, J. M. (1990). Plains of passage. New York: CrownPublishers.

Auel, J. M. (2002). The shelters of stone. New York:Crown Publishers.

4 AURIGNACIAN CULTURE

The Aurignacian is an early Upper Paleolithic, or LateStone Age, culture dating to between 34,000 and27,000 years before the present (BP). Aurignacianartifacts have long been considered representative ofthe culture of the first anatomically modern humans(Homo sapiens sapiens) to migrate into continentalEurope. This is currently an issue of intense debate, assome archaeologists argue that Aurignacian artifactsmay actually be the result of acculturation wherebymigrating populations of anatomically modernhumans were interacting with indigenous Neandertalpopulations and producing what archaeologistsrecognize as the Aurignacian culture.

Aurignacian artifacts consist mainly of stone andbone tools and reflect the technological capacity to

produce parallel-sided stone blades and the ability totransform organic materials into tools. The averageAurignacian stone artifact assemblage includes a varietyof tools, like burins, end scrapers, resharpened flakes,and blades with marginal resharpening. Comparedwith earlier Paleolithic cultures, Aurignacian stonetools reflect (a) an increase in the number of endscrapers, (b) an overall reduction of resharpenedblades, and (c) the emergence of carinated andDufour-type bladelets. Aurignacian stone tools areoften made on nonlocal stone, especially in earlyassemblages, which were obtained from sources as faras 45 km from where they were found by archaeolo-gists. Understanding of the chronological develop-ment of Aurignacian stone tools is hampered by thefact that most Aurignacian assemblages have compar-atively low diversity indices and overall small samplesizes. Consequently, the shape of the base of boneprojectile points is often used as primary chronologi-cal markers instead. For example, Aurignacian PhasesI-V are characterized by split, forked, beveled, andunmodifed bases, respectively.

The geographic distribution of AurignacianCulture ranges from “classic” manifestations in conti-nental Europe, particularly southwestern France, toperhaps pre- and proto-Aurignacian in the Levant,the Zagros, the Caucasus, and Central Asia. Far froman in situ European development, archaeologistsnow think that Aurignacian culture most likelydescends from one of these eastern core areas andappeared in Europe through relatively late populationmovements.

Aurignacian populations were organized into small,nomadic hunting-and-gathering bands that probablyoccupied a territory of less than 200 sq km. Settlementpatterns, at least for the classic Aurignacian, werefocused on river valleys in both open and rocksheltersites. Internal site patterning was documented at aseries of open sites on the Hornad River in the formerCzechoslovakia and consisted of multiple, variablyshaped features and postholes. It has been hypothe-sized that these are the remains of structures withinternal hearths.

Paleoenvironmental data indicate the earlyAurignacian was marked by a cold, dry, and opensteppelike environment, whereas the late Aurignaciansaw a warm, wet, and forested environment. Thisenvironmental shift is corroborated by changes inAurignacian stone tool technology and economy. Forexample, in the Vézère Valley of southwestern France,

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALIA 301

the number of burins and thick scrapers increases inlater assemblages, which is argued to reflect adaptationsto changes in the type and distribution of plants andanimals. Early Aurignacian artifact assemblages aredominated by the combination of reindeer and highproportions of nonlocal stone, while later ones containgreater animal diversity (seasonally available smallmammals and fish) and a lower proportion of non-local stone. Taken collectively, the environmental andarchaeological data are consistent with a pattern ofhighly specialized hunting and gathering for the earlyAurignacian, presumably associated with the acquisi-tion of highly mobile animals, and a more generalizedfood-getting strategy for later Aurignacian, as an arrayof diverse, less mobile fauna became locally available.

Artistic expression also begins to take on moreimportance during the Aurignacian. Examples of dec-orated bone, antler, and stone blocks have been foundat Aurignacian sites in Spain and southwesternFrance. Some French caves contain geometric config-urations such as chevrons, crosses, and parallel lines.Animal figurines, and a possible human form, areknown from the German site of Vogelherd. Thesedata are often taken as evidence of an Aurignaciansymbolic system, though their actual meaningremains enigmatic. Perhaps stronger, yet no less enig-matic, evidence for an Aurignacian symbolic systemcomes from the site of Cueva Morin in Spain, wherea complex burial ritual was documented. This site isunique because it contains four burials, of whichMorin I is the best preserved, and instead of skeletalremains, natural casts of the bodies were found.Careful excavation of Morin I showed that the indi-vidual was buried on his back in an extended posi-tion. The body appeared to have been mutilated, withthe head and feet completely removed. A quartziteblade was found undisturbed near the head, and alarge animal was placed on top of the torso, while asmaller animal was placed over the legs. The burial pitwas then filled and mounded with earth, sprinkledwith red ochre (a natural mineral pigment) and setafire. It is postulated that these burial practices per-sisted for some time, because they were not disturbedby later occupations at Cueva Morin.

The Aurignacian culture began to diminish around27,000 BP and eventually disappeared completely aslocal varieties were replaced by the Gravettian cultureduring the Middle Upper Paleolithic.

— Phillip R. Hodge

Further Readings

Blades, B. S. (1999). Aurignacian settlement patternsin the Vézère Valley. Current Anthropology 40,712–719.

Blades, B. S. (2001). Aurignacian lithic economy:Ecological perspectives from southwestern France.New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Kozlowski, J. K., & Otte, M. (1999). The formation ofthe Aurignacian in Europe. Journal ofAnthropological Research, 56, 513–534.

Phillips, P. (1980). The prehistory of Europe.Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

4 AUSTRALIA

The Commonwealth of Australia is a country, a conti-nent, and an island. It lies completely in the southernhemisphere, southeast of the Asian landmass, betweenthe Indian and Pacific Oceans. The name Australia isderived from the Latin australis, meaning “southern.”As far back as the second century AD, legends hinted atthe existence of an “unknown southern land” or terraaustralis incognita. While maps from the late 1400sshow parts of the coastline, the land was not “officially”discovered by Europeans until the 17th century, when aseries of expeditions were led by Dutch and Portugueseexplorers.

Australia has been separated from other landmassesfor millions of years. It is also the lowest, flattest, andaside from Antarctica, the driest of the continents.This long period of isolation combined with unusualterrain has enabled many unique geologic features,environments, plants, and animals to develop.

The Land

For millions of years, Australia was part of the super-continent of Pangea. As the continent broke apart andbegan drifting on the surface of the planet, Australiawas part of the southern segment of Gondwana. Sincesevering its last connections with Antarctica andthe island of Tasmania in the mid-Cenozoic (about35 million years ago), Australia has been driftingtoward southeast Asia at the rate of about 2 inches peryear. Geologically speaking, Australia’s life span as afree-standing continent will be relatively brief.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALIA302

Australia has been free of volcanoes, earthquakes,and other mountain-building forces longer than anyother continent. Wind and rain have been eroding thesurface for about 100 million years, making Australia’sdominant feature its flatness. The extreme state oferosion in Western Australia has exposed some of theEarth’s oldest rocks, dating back 4.3 billion years.

Unique Geologic Features

Uluru, the world’s largest single rock, is the mostvisited landmark in central Australia. Uluru is anAboriginal word meaning “great pebble.” It is thelargest of a group of about 30 similar dome-shapedrocks rising from the desert floor. These rocks are theremains of a buried mountain range and are collec-tively known as the Olgas. The Aboriginal name ofthe Olga Rocks is Kata Tjuta, which means “manyheads.” Uluru’s size and color attract visitors fromaround the world. As the sun travels across the sky,the rock changes from brilliant red to a deep bluecolor. The Olgas are sacred to the Aborigines. Rock

art found in caves on Uluru is thousands of years old.Sacred areas of the rock are off limits to all visitors,and one must ask permission before climbing markedtrails. Kata Tjuta lies within Uluru National Park,which the government returned to its Aboriginal own-ers, the Anangu people, in 1985. Uluru was formerlycalled “Ayers Rock,” after Sir Henry Ayers, a formerleader of South Australia, but the Aboriginal peopleprefer the original names for these sites be used.

The Great Barrier Reef is a 1,200-mile long coralreef running along the Queensland coast of northeastAustralia. Coral is created from masses of smallmarine animals called polyps. As polyps die, theyleave their skeletons behind, which form the massof the reef. New polyps grow on the old, creating arainbow of colors. The Great Barrier Reef is thelargest structure created by living organisms in theworld. Parts of it are millions of years old. The reef ishome to hundreds of species of fish, mollusks, andother marine life.

Stromatolites are the oldest known fossils in theworld, dating back more than 3 billion years. They areeven more unusual in that the fossil form was foundyears before scientists found live specimens stilldeveloping. Stromatolites are formed by photosyn-thesizing cyannobacteria and other microbes thatbuild “reefs” in the same way that coral grows. It isbelieved that cyannobacteria were most likely respon-sible for creating our oxygen atmosphere billions ofyears ago. These bacteria were the dominant life formon the planet for over 2 billion years. Today, they arealmost extinct and live in very few locations aroundthe world. One place living stromatolites can befound currently is in the Shark Bay World HeritageArea on Australia’s west coast. The extreme salinity ofthe seawater, limited water circulation, warm temper-atures, and presence of calcium carbonate create anenvironment ideal for the growth of stromatolites.Predators of the microbes cannot survive in this envi-ronment, because it has twice the salinity of regularseawater, so the cyannobacteria can grow unchecked.

The Climate

Australia is divided into three major zones. TheWestern Plateau covers almost two thirds of the con-tinent and is mainly desert, with a few low mountainsaround the edge. The Central Lowlands are a monot-onous, harsh area where most of the rivers and lakesare often dry. The Eastern Highlands is a narrow,

Source: ©iStockphoto/Kim Meagher.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALIA 303

fertile strip of land along the Eastern Coast dividedfrom the rest of the country by the Great DividingRange. Most of Australia’s population lives in thiszone of good farming land, with a moderate climateand adequate rainfall.

Recent evidence suggests that the first settlersarriving in Australia 50,000 years ago set fires to clearthe land for farming. These burning practices werewidespread and could have triggered a cataclysmicchange in the weather. The interior of Australia wasmuch wetter 125,000 years ago. The last Ice Agechanged the world’s weather, but when the glaciersretreated 12,000 years ago, monsoons returned,except for the Australian monsoon. While theAustralian monsoon currently brings about 40 inchesof rain to the rainforests of the north coast, onlyabout 13 inches of rain annually reach the interior.This suggests that those large fires in the past elimi-nated the plant population, which decreased theexchange of water vapor with the atmosphere andgreatly reduced cloud formation in the interior,resulting in far less rainfall. Fossil evidence indicatesthat animals living in the interior used to graze ongrasses, bushes, and trees that could not survive thereunder current conditions. The fossil record also dis-plays large charcoal deposits that were most likelycaused by widespread fires, also conveniently dated tothe time those early settlers arrived.

The Flora

Australia has no large densely forested areas. Plantgrowth generally consists of grasslands, shrubs, oropen forests. Many plants are drought resistant tosurvive in the harsh, hot climate. Trees tend to havedeep taproots to reach water far below the surface.Plant leaves and stems are often light colored or shinyto reflect the sun’s rays.

Vegetation in Australia is dominated by two groupsof plants. Eucalypts (gum trees) and acacias (wattles)together have more than 1,000 species. Eucalyptus isan evergreen hardwood with tough, thick leaves thatretain water. The tree is oily, which feeds wildfires.Lightning strikes frequently cause fires in such an aridenvironment. Acacias are economically valuable fortheir timber, their gum, and their edible seeds.

The Eastern Highlands have temperate and tropi-cal rain forests. The temperate zones have seasonalfluctuations, and the tropical areas are always hot.The tropical rainforest areas are along the northern

coast, close to the equator. The Central Lowlandsand Western Plateau are desert or semidesert. Thetemperatures get extremely high during the day andcool very rapidly at night. Rainfall is almost nonexis-tent. The grasslands and savannas on the borders ofthe deserts are known as “the bush.” The central andwestern portions together are known as the “out-back,” because they are “out back of ” the GreatDividing Range.

Since European colonization, Australia has lost70% of its native vegetation, 45% of its forest, and75% of its rainforests. Loss of this native plant growthhas resulted in the endangerment or extinction ofdozens of animal species.

The Fauna

Australia is the home of many unique animals.Monotremes can only be found in Australia, and NewGuinea to the immediate north. Monotremes aremammals that lay eggs but nurse their young withmilk after hatching. The platypus and the echidnaare currently the only monotremes in the world. Theplatypus is about 2 feet long, has dark brown fur, a billlike a duck, and webbed feet and a tail to help it swim.Plates on its bill help it crush worms, mollusks, crus-taceans, and plants for food. They usually live nearriverbanks in Eastern Australia. While they can moveon land, they move awkwardly on their knuckles. Thefemales lay eggs that hatch within 10 days and nursetheir young for about 5 months. Echidnas are spinyanteaters. They have strong bodies with short legs andrelatively large feet and claws. They dig up worms,ants, and termites to eat. The females also lay eggsthat hatch within 10 days, but when the young hatch,they climb into their mother’s pouch for 6 to 8 moreweeks. They nurse during that time. The echidna lifespan is over 50 years. Humans are the only mammalsthat live longer.

Marsupials are the animals most commonly associ-ated with Australia. A few species of marsupial can befound in South America, but most make their homesonly in Australia and Tasmania. Marsupials are mam-mals that give birth to underdeveloped young, whichmust then climb into a pouch on the mother to con-tinue growing. Kangaroos, wallabies (small kanga-roos), koala bears, wombats, possums, and bandicootsare the best-recognized plant-eating marsupials. Somemarsupials are carnivorous. The Tasmanian tiger, asmall, fierce hunter, is now believed to be extinct. The

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALIA304

Tasmanian devil is an aggressive black badger-sizedcreature with a white stripe on its chest. It hunts smallmammals and birds at night.

The dingo, considered the native dog of Australia,originated with dogs brought to the continent bytraders 3000 to 4000 years ago and abandoned.Dingos were domesticated by Aboriginal people.They were used for hunting and guarding homes.Dingos do not bark, but communicate by howling.

Australia is home to over 700 species of bird. Morethan half of those are native. The largest birds, theemu and cassowary, are flightless. The emu is thesecond-largest bird in the world, after the Africanostrich. One of the best-known Australian birds is thekookaburra. It is a member of the kingfisher familyand has a distinctive loud cackling laugh.

Being an island nation, Australia has close contactwith marine life. The Great Barrier Reef off thenortheast coast is the largest coral reef in the worldand is home to hundreds of exotic and colorfulspecies. Australia is known for its sharks, especiallyGreat Whites, but its coastal waters are also home towhales, giant sea turtles, dugongs (a type of seacow),and dolphins.

Reptiles can be found widely across Australia,including crocodiles, snakes, lizards, turtles, and tor-toises. Australia has no alligators, but crocodiles arethe largest living reptile in the country. They can befound only in the north. Saltwater crocodiles are themost dangerous to humans, while freshwater croco-diles are mostly harmless. There are about 110 speciesof snakes in Australia, and about half of them are ven-omous. The taipan and tiger snake are deadliest, butdeath adders, copperheads, and brown snakes can allbe dangerous to humans. Goannas are lizards that cangrow over 6 feet long and can be aggressive if dis-turbed. Australia is also home to some of the world’sdeadliest spiders. The funnel-web spider’s bite can befatal to humans, and these large, aggressive spiderswill actually chase their prey (including humans) ifdisturbed.

The People

Native Australians are called Aborigines. Aboriginecomes from the Latin ab origine, which means “fromthe beginning.” Australian natives do not call them-selves Aborigines. Europeans coined the name uponarriving on the continent and finding it inhabited.Aborigines refer to themselves by their tribal names.

There are two groups of indigenous people inAustralia; Australian Aborigines and Torres StraightIslanders. The Torres Straight Islanders were seafarerswho inhabited the small islands in the Torres Straight,which separates Australia from Papua New Guineato the north. In recent decades, migration from theTorres Straight has been extensive, and most TorresStraight Islanders now live in Australia.

The first Australians appear to have traveled to thecontinent by raft or boat from Asia at least 40,000 yearsago, during the last Ice Age. At that time, the sea levelwas much lower, leaving far narrower bands of waterto cross. While the water was narrower, it was still toofar across to see land. It has been speculated thatsmoke from large brush fires may have encouragedthose first settlers to explore.

Nomadic tribes of hunters and gatherers roamedthe continent freely, each group having its own lan-guage and customs. As the Ice Age ended, the icemelted, the seas rose, and Australia became isolated.The inland lakes dried up, the temperatures rose, andthe deserts formed. As the land grew increasinglyinhospitable over thousands of years, the Aboriginalpeople adapted and learned to thrive. They huntedand fished, and gathered fruits, nuts, roots, fungi, andinsects. They grew skilled at finding water where thereappeared to be none. They were also traders, withtrade routes crossing the country. They traded ochre,which is a pigment for painting, boomerangs, shells,stones, tools, and more.

There are approximately 500 recorded tribes ofAborigines. They lived in clans, or family groups.Each clan also incorporated several species of animal,one of which was selected as the totem for that tribe.Each clan had a territory, which included a sacredlocation where their spirits would return after theydie. These places were carefully protected so theywouldn’t anger their ancestors. Myths and ritualsplayed a strong role in Aboriginal culture. A rich oralhistory derives from the Dreaming, or Dreamtime.The Dreaming tells of the creation of the land andpeople, and stories told today still involve mythiccreatures from the Dreaming. Aspects of theDreamtime are depicted in art found on rock wallsdating back thousands of years. The paintings areabstract, incorporating many codes and symbolsunderstood by Aborigines to relate ancestral stories.

The British were the first Europeans to colonizeAustralia. In 1770, Captain James Cook claimed theland for Great Britain. The first settlement, Port

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALIA 305

Jackson, was established in a promising harbor calledSydney Harbor, on the southeast coast. This settle-ment grew into the city of Sydney. From 1788 to 1852,England used Australia as a penal colony to free spacein overcrowded British prisons. More than 160,000men, women, and children were sent to New SouthWales as convicts. After release, few prisonersreturned to England. Most established themselves inAustralia as farmers or tradesmen.

Australia, if thought about at all in the West, wasportrayed as a wild land suitable only for convicts oradventurers. This attitude would change. On January12, 1836, Charles Darwin sailed into Sydney Cove onthe Beagle. He was concluding his 5-year study of nat-ural history around the globe and developing histheories about natural selection and its evolutionaryrole. Darwin made brief forays into New South Wales,sailed on to the island of Tasmania, and concluded hisvisit on King George’s Sound on the southwest shore.He sailed onward from Australia on March 14, 1836.Although he made a brief 2-month visit and remainedon the southern coast, Darwin’s work stimulatedscholarly interest in Australia. To honor his work, thecity of Palmerston on the “Top End” (the coast of theNorthern Territory) was renamed “Darwin” in 1911.

The Future

As the British colonized Australia, they did not recog-nize Aboriginal ownership of the land. As Aboriginesbegan to resist the settlers moving into their territory,colonists simply massacred native groups. Tribes wereforced to live on reservations in the most hostile areasof the country or on religious missions.

In recent years, the Australian government hasbegun to acknowledge many decades of mistreat-ment. A department was established within thegovernment to address Aboriginal affairs. Laws havebeen passed to return land to its original owners.Aboriginal art is now recognized and in demandworldwide. Painting, storytelling, and folk music areincreasingly appreciated. Despite these gains, how-ever, Aborigines are still the most disadvantagedcitizens economically.

A history of egalitarianism has made an increas-ingly diverse population grow with a minimalamount of tension or conflict. Today, Australia is oneof the most culturally diverse nations on the planet.Trade and tourism have been a boon to the economy.Australia is a vibrant young nation that has adapted

well to rapid change. The country’s greatest challenge,perhaps, will be to meet the demands of the futurewithout losing the traditions that built the nation.

— Jill M. Church

See also Aborigines; Australian Aborigines; Darwin,Charles

Further Readings

Cosgrove, P. (2001). Australia: The completeencyclopedia. Buffalo, NY: Firefly Books.

Cowan, J. G. (1997). Elements of the Aboriginetradition. London: Thorsons/Element.

Davison, G., Hirst, J., & MacIntyre, S. (2001). TheOxford companion to Australian history. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Flannery, T. (2002). The future eaters: An ecologicalhistory of the Australian lands and people. Berkeley,CA: Grove Press.

Menkhorst, P., & Knight, F. (2001). A field guide to themammals of Australia. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.

Mulvaney, J., & Kamminga, J. (1999). Prehistory ofAustralia. Washington DC: Smithsonian Books.

Smitz, P., Bain, C., & Bedford, N. (2004). Australia.Oakland, CA: Lonely Planet.

AUSTR ALIA

In 1993, Australian anthropologist Julie Marcusedited a slim volume of essays on Australianwomen anthropologists. The essays were derivedfrom papers presented at two conferences onwomen’s issues. The first conference, “When theVoice of the Turtle Shall Be Heard in the Land,” tookplace in Glenelg, Adelaide, in 1990. The secondmeeting occurred as a workshop at the 1991 sessionof the Academy of the Humanities. Marcus and theother women who contributed to the volumehighlighted the contributions of pioneer Australiananthropologists such as Isobel White, CatherineBerndt, Mary Ellen Murray-Prior, Daisy Bates, andOlive Pink. These women had enormous impact oncontemporary female Australian anthropologists.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALIAN AB ORIGINES306

4 AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINES

The societies and cultures of Australian Aborigineshave captured the interest of anthropologists for avariety of reasons. In the evolutionist anthropologyof the 19th century, they were thought to representsurvivals of “Stone Age man.” For the French sociolo-gist Emile Durkheim, their religions representedthe “earliest” and most pure type of religion. By thebeginning of the 20th century, with the demise ofevolutionist anthropology, anthropologists becameinterested in Aboriginal cultures and societies fortheir intrinsic qualities and in some cases out of aconcern for social justice.

A series of ethnographic studies appeared from thelate 19th century and through the 20th century,resulting from research among communities livingon missions and government stations or on thefringes of country towns such as Alice Springs butlargely treating their ways of life as pristine systems.From the mid-20th century, a number of ethnogra-phies dealt with Aboriginal communities living onthe fringes of country towns and within larger townsand cities. Anthropological interests shifted in the late20th century toward studies of the relationshipsbetween Aboriginal people and the missions, theirposition in Australian society, and the history of thatrelationship.

Australian feminist anthropologists maintain thatmales have continued to dominate the field ofanthropology in large part because of the settlermentality in which Australia was founded. Theybelieve that in the past, women anthropologistsoften worked without identifying themselves asfeminists in order to bypass the prejudices againstwomen academicians. Nevertheless, these womencontinued to study the anthropology of Australianwomen, and many of those studies, such as thoseconducted by Olive Pink and Phyllis Kaberry, havecentered on the lives and issues of Aboriginalwomen who continue to face an entrencheddichotomy of racism and sexism.

The issue of domestic violence among Aboriginalwomen has been receiving increasing attention inAustralia since the 1990s, because it has reachedwhat some consider to be epidemic proportions.Aboriginal women, to a much greater degree thanother Australian females, have been marginalized bythe colonial traits that linger in Australian culture.High rates of domestic violence are due in part tothe Aboriginal practice of men flogging their wiveswith hammers, knives, sticks, stones, or pickets. Thispractice frequently leads to murder, rape, incest, andsevere physical and mental injuries. As members ofa minority population, Aboriginal women often lackthe resources to combat violence without outsideintervention. However, most scholars feel that thesubject of Aboriginal domestic violence has beencloaked in a veil of secrecy because the victimshave no desire to expose themselves to communityscrutiny. Nor do they wish to face the possibilityof being stereotyped by white Australians. Whileanthropologists Diane Bell and Katherine Burbankhave noted that Aboriginal women may sometimesinitiate violence, particularly verbal abuse, malesinstigate most of the violence in Aboriginalcommunities. Such violence may be a result of thealcoholism rampant in many Aborigine communities,or it may simply be the result of an Aboriginal maleexercising what he perceives as his natural rightto dominate Aboriginal women. One 1995 studyestimated that as many as 46.9% of all Aboriginalwomen are attacked at some point in their livescompared with 11.4% of the white femalepopulation who will be attacked.

In response to a request for informationon the status of women in Australia regarding the

implementation of the 1995 Beijing Platform forAction, the Australian government stated in 2000that it had classified domestic violence as an issueworthy of “national importance.” In conjunctionwith governments in Australian states andterritories, as well as with businesses and localcommunities, the Australian government pledged$50 million from 2001 to 2005 to support itsPartnerships Against Domestic Violence initiative,which included more than 230 separate projects.One of those initiatives included the AustralianDomestic Violence Clearinghouse, which wasdesigned to integrate scholarly work on domesticviolence with government policies.

— Elizabeth Purdy

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALIAN AB ORIGINES 307

Prehistory

Archaeologists date the first arrival of modernhumans into Australia and New Guinea at about50,000 years ago. Until the British colonization ofAustralia, which began in 1788, Australia and itspeoples remained relatively isolated. The Australianlandmass was periodically joined to the islands ofNew Guinea at times of low sea level to form thecontinent of Sahul. Following the end of the last suchglacial period about 12,000 years ago, rising sea levelsseparated Australia from New Guinea, and Tasmania(and other smaller islands) from the mainland.Nevertheless, social intercourse continued, at leastsporadically, across the Torres Strait, and in recentcenturies, Macassan visitors voyaged on the summermonsoon winds from what is now Sulawesi, to thenorth coast of Australia, to gather bêche-de-mer.Despite these northerly contacts, Aboriginal peopleacross the continent retained a hunting, gathering,and fishing mode of subsistence across the continent,although it can be argued that they practiced a formof “cultivation” through various kinds of interven-tions in the reproduction of food species, particularlythrough the use of fire to burn off the understory.Aborigines developed complex cosmologies, rituals,and forms of kinship and social organization andwere linguistically very diverse; and their forms ofsociety and culture were also quite diverse.

Population

The first systematic attempt at estimating the pre-colonial population was that of A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, who arrived at a minimum population of300,000. This estimate has recently been revisedupwards on the grounds that the early estimatesneglected the effects of smallpox, which ravaged thepopulations of many areas ahead of the British fron-tier. Archaeologists now consider a figure between500,000 and a million to be plausible. Populationdensities probably ranged from about one person per200 sq km in the arid zone to perhaps one person per2 to 3 sq km on coasts with rich marine and terrestrialresources, and along the lower Murray River.

Ecology

In the 1920s and 1930s, Norman Tindale and DonaldThomson carried out pioneering studies of Aboriginal

relations to the environment. The systematic study ofrelationships between Aboriginal communities, terri-tories, and resources in remote regions did not beginuntil the late 1950s, however, fostered by develop-ments in cultural ecology and by archaeological inter-est in ethnography. The best of the later research tookplace in the Western Desert and northeast ArnhemLand, for example, in the research of Richard Gouldand Nicolas Peterson.

Overall, Australia is the most arid of continents, butAustralian environments are nonetheless very varied,from the monsoon climate of the tropical north,through the low and unreliable rainfall of the aridzones with their sandy and stony deserts, to the tem-perate climate of the southeast with its year-roundrainfall; and vegetation varied from the rainforests ofthe east and north coasts to the deserts of the arid zone.

The richer resources on some of the coasts and themajor Murray-Darling River system enabled someAboriginal peoples to live a relatively sedentarylife. Conditions elsewhere, however, required higherdegrees of mobility. But people everywhere, even theleast mobile, combined living in a home base with“logistical mobility”; that is, people made food-collecting and hunting forays out from the homebase, usually traveling no further than could beaccommodated within a day. People moved homebase a few times a year on the rich coasts of easternCape York Peninsula, but (in a study by RichardGould) nine times in 3 months in the Western Desert,where the search for water in particular dictatedmovement. The size of the foraging range was in thevicinity of 30 to 100 sq km in northeast Arnhem Landand 3,000 sq km in the Western Desert.

The average size of the home base varied fromabout 20 to 50 people in the tropical north but abouthalf this range in the Western Desert. People cametogether in larger numbers from time to time, aroundseasonally rich resources or permanent water sources,using the opportunity to conduct major ceremoniessuch as male initiation. Movement in some regionsexhibited a markedly seasonal pattern. In the tropicalnorth, for example, people were very mobile in thedry season but constrained by summer rains toremain in larger camps on high ground.

Technologies

Some of the very early amateur ethnographers, suchas K. Langloh Parker, exhibited a keen interest in

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


Aboriginal technologies, a concern that becamepushed into the background with the development ofstructural functional anthropology. The basic tech-nology was similar everywhere, with men usingspears (and harpoons on the coast), throwing sticks,and using facilities including fish traps, while womendeployed the hardwood digging stick and variouskinds of containers. The use of larger facilities such asnets and fish traps varied greatly according to region,as did the use of watercraft. Fire was the main instru-ment for converting the physical properties of rawmaterials and foods, and the main motive powerremained human muscle power, except for limiteduse of wind power for watercraft in Arnhem Land inrecent centuries. Some notable regional variantsincluded the use of a wide variety of fish traps inArnhem Land, the extensive use of nets in the grass-land and woodland of New South Wales, and thedouble-layered raft of the west Kimberley coast.

Organization of Production

Anthropologists did not theorize Aboriginal “econ-omy” adequately until the 1980s, with the work ofscholars such as Jon Altman. The ethnographicrecord is therefore patchy. The organization of pro-duction appears to have been similar in all regions.There was a marked division of labor along genderlines, with women usually hunting small game, gath-ering vegetable foods, and in some regions fishing.Men hunted larger game, including marine mammals

and reptiles on the coast,and fished. In all regions,the size of work teamsvaried from working solo,through small single- andmixed-gender teams (two-five people) and largerteams of mixed or singlegender (six or more people).The organization of workvaried with the task, fromworking in parallel to asimple division of laboraround one or more itemsof equipment. Cooperativeteams drew both on single-hearth groups and acrossseveral-hearth groups ofthe home base residence

group (“band”). Men were probably the more mobile,especially where watercraft were involved.

Identities

In the classical models of Aboriginal social organiza-tion synthesized by A. R. Radcliffe-Brown, Aborigineswere organized into “tribes,” “hordes,” “clans,” andfamily groups. Research conducted from the 1970shas changed anthropological views and led to thereinterpretation of early ethnography. What wereregarded as endogamous tribes are predominantlylanguage identities. Commonly, people related namedlanguages to specific areas of land (and waters),though not always with clear boundaries, so that aperson belonged both to a language and its territory,even if he or she did not speak the language. Someindividuals had dual- or multiple-language identities(one from each parent). Language varieties in theWestern Desert had a context-dependent, “shifting”character, while in some areas, such as Gippsland,regional identities dominated, so that people identi-fied as “northerners,” “people of the sandy islands,”and so on.

According to the classic models, “tribes” wereeverywhere divided into patrilineal “clans.” Again,recent research has shown Aboriginal social orga-nization to have been more diverse than this modelsuggests. In the Western Desert, groups of mixedcomposition owned clusters of totemic ancestral sites(most commonly waterholes) and adjacent areas, on

Source: ©Royalty-free/CORBIS.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALIAN AB ORIGINES 309

the basis of place of birth, place of conception, placeof male initiation, depth of knowledge, and othergrounds, so that membership of these groups over-lapped considerably. Place of birth seems to havebeen the main basis of attachment to country innorth central New South Wales, but in many regions,patrifilial groups were the dominant form of land-holding groups. Individuals enjoyed a variety of com-plementary connections and associated rights, forexample, in a person’s mother’s country, spouse’scountry, through adoption, links to a grandparent’scountry, and so on. These connections formed thebasis for preferences about where to reside, hunt,and gather. Residence groups formed around a vari-ety of attachments to areas of land and waters definedby totemic ancestral sites, but with a bias towardpatrifilial ties in regions where land was held bypatrilineal groups.

Religion and Cosmology

Early studies such as those of K. Langloh Parker andW. E. H. Howitt wrote of Aboriginal ceremonies, myths,and magic but did not classify doctrines and practicesas “religion.” The concept of “totemism” played a cen-tral role in syntheses such as those of Sir James Frazer.Durkheim, however, saw Aboriginal doctrines andpractices as those of a primal “religion,” and that viewwas taken up in the writings of W. E. H. Stanner.More recently, the concept of “Dreamtime” or “theDreaming” has become a popular way of representingAboriginal cosmology, ritual, and ancestral “law.”

Myths about totemic ancestors who took the iden-tities and some of the characteristics of natural phe-nomena and species appear in all regions. Mythologiesspeak of a creative period in which totemic ancestorstraveled and left their substance, powers, and traces oftheir activities in land and waters. Some regions, suchas the Western Desert and the Kimberley, emphasizelong, cross-cutting journeys across the land. Others,notably the southeast, give some emphasis to thesky, the final domain of a single ancestral figure, pair,or family. Many localities related to the “sky-being”as well as having local totemic identities. In someregions, such as eastern Cape York Peninsula, ances-tral journeys are minimal, and localities are highlydifferentiated by their totemic associations.

Ceremonies reenact ancestral events, and partici-pants identify with totemic ancestors through bodydecoration, song, and mimetic dances. But people

draw on this basic pattern to achieve many socialends; ceremonies include female puberty rites, maleinitiation, the revelation of secret objects and dances,exchange, mortuary rites, and dispute settlement.

Many approaches to Aboriginal religions neglecttheir “magical” instrumental aspect. In many regions,men combined the role of magician, sorcery, rain-maker, and healer. These “clever men” were alsoleaders of totemic ancestral ceremonies. Furthermore,in many regions, including the Western Desert, east-ern Cape York Peninsula and the Kimberley, totemicancestral sites were places where the enactment of rit-uals was believed to ensure the supply of rain, plantand animal resources, and human fertility. In someregions, people believed that ancestral powers couldbe drawn on to harm one’s enemies, as with sorcerypractices, and people of a number of regions enactedrituals associated with so-called love magic.

Kinship and Marriage

The analysis of the structure of Aboriginal systems ofkinship and marriage became something of a minorindustry in structural functionalist and structuralistanthropology, where kinship was taken to be more orless synonymous with social structure. Their elabora-tion is due to their relationship in a variety of wayswith marriage bestowal, moiety, semimoiety, sectionand subsection systems, and patrigroup and matri-group membership. Potential spouses are defined interms of kin relatedness, usually some kind of cross-cousin. As Claude Levi-Strauss has shown, modesof kin classification reflect patterns of exchangerelations and marriage networks. And as a number ofscholars have demonstrated, marriage occupied acentral place in Aboriginal political economy and wasrelated to varying levels of polygyny.

Exchange

Claude Levi-Strauss represented Aboriginal marriagesystems as systems of exchange of rights in women.However, marriage in which people exchanged rightsin a person as a spouse for goods and services formedpart of wider networks of distribution and exchangeof goods and services. Broad patterns of distributionappear to have been similar across Australia, withwomen’s product (small game, vegetable foods, andso on) being distributed primarily within their ownhearth group and men’s product (including larger

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


game) being distributed more widely within a residencegroup, partly according to customary obligations, suchas to one’s wife’s parents. Wider networks of exchange,so-called trade, were composed partly of chains ofhand-to-hand exchanges, partly of barter at certainlocations and partly of long-distance travel to acquiregoods (such as pituri, native tobacco). Some exchangeitems such as pearl shell travelled vast distances fromtheir places of origin. The form of marriage networksand exchange networks varied from the asymmetricalchains of the western Kimberly wurnan system todiffuse networks of dispersed affinal alliance.

Governance

Unlike Africa, where British colonial administrationinvolved indirect rule, fostering anthropologicalresearch on indigenous politics and law, the anthro-pology of these subjects in Australia remained rela-tively undeveloped, with some exceptions such as theresearch of Nancy Williams. Debates centered aroundthe nature of authority and the existence or otherwiseof “chiefs” and “councils” of elders. The neo-Marxistanalyses of the late 1970s extended the focus to genderrelations.

Relations of power and authority were shapedalong age and gender lines, and there were no chieflyoffices or specialized governmental institutions.“Ancestral law” was framed through more or lessshared doctrines about totemic ancestors, enacted inregional ceremonies, and male initiation and revela-tory rites worked in part as formal modes of socializa-tion. Networks of kin enforced norms and tookredressive action through a pattern of what RonaldBerndt called “self-help.” Within these similarities,resources of power and the degree of inequality variedfrom region to region.

Aborigines and Australian Society

Anthropologists such as the Berndts, Marie Reay, andJeremy Beckett made studies of Aboriginal comm-unities in southern towns and cities in the mid-20thcentury. From the early 1980s, younger scholars beganto move toward studies of the relationship betweenAborigines and the missions, the history of Aboriginalrelations to the state, the economy of Aboriginal town-ships, race relations, and the social life of Aboriginalpeople of mixed descent living in or on the fringes ofsouthern towns and cities.

Following the initial penal settlements, coloniza-tion proceeded rapidly in the southeast and southwestof the continent from the early 1800s, spurred by thegold rushes. This process had devastating effects onAboriginal populations as the result of violence andintroduced diseases. The frontier moved across thenorthern and central parts of the continent ratherlater, as farming spread north along the east coast andthe pastoral frontier moved north and west. Only inthe remote north and in parts of the arid zone lesssuited to cattle did Aboriginal communities escapelarge-scale disruption and destruction. In most partsof the continent, Aboriginal people were moved ontomissions and government stations under protection-ist policies. By the 1930s, the enumerated Aboriginalpopulation was reduced to some 60,000.

The result of the varied history of colonization andof the varying forms of agriculture, mining, industry,and urban development was that Aboriginal peoplecame to live in a wide variety of relations with non-Aboriginal communities. Some Aboriginal communi-ties had formed on missions and government stationsin remote regions. Aboriginal people who became thelabor force for the pastoral industry were able tomaintain their relations to land, their social organiza-tion, and their religious life to a considerable extent.In some regions, Aboriginal groups attached them-selves to small-scale producers such as miners andbuffalo hunters. In the southeast, Aboriginal peopleof mixed descent, after being ejected from the mis-sions, formed a mobile labor force, working as pickersin the farms and orchards. After the mechanization offarm production and the introduction of award wages,levels of employment fell, and Aboriginal peoplemigrated in increasing numbers to towns and cities.

By the early 1970s, race-based legislation such asthe protectionist policies of the late 19th and early20th centuries and the assimilationist policies of mid-century had largely ended. Aboriginal people wereaccorded both the rights of non-Aboriginal citizens,such as the right to vote and access to mainstreamwelfare provisions and special rights. The WhitlamLabor government (1972–1975) ushered in a federalpolicy of “self-determination” and introduced theAboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Bill,enacted by the government of Malcolm Fraser. Somestates followed with various forms of land rights leg-islation. In 1992, the finding of the High Court in theMabo case overturned the legal doctrine of terra nul-lius and opened the way for Aboriginal communities

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALOPITHECINES 311

to make native title claims to vacant Crown land andsome pastoral leases. The formation of the Aboriginaland Torres Strait Islander Commission transformedthe administration of indigenous affairs, with theestablishment of a separate arm of government anda structure of local representatives, regional councils,and the commission. The scope of the commission’spowers were limited, however, and the commissionwas dismantled by the conservative government ofPrime Minister John Howard. The reelection of thisgovernment in 2004 promises a further transforma-tion of the administration of indigenous affairs,rolling back special rights and access to welfare provi-sion and increasing incentives to engage in mainstreameconomic activities. Aboriginal people continue, how-ever, to suffer from poverty, be overrepresented inprisons, and have lower life expectancy than the non-Aboriginal population of Australia.

— Ian Keen

See also Aborigines; Australia; Durkheim, Emile;Radcliffe-Brown, A. R.; Totemism

Further Readings

Broome, R. (2002). Aboriginal Australians: Blackresponses to white dominance, 1788–2001.St. Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Cowlishaw, G. (2004). Blackfellas, whitefellas, and thehidden injuries of race. Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Keen, I. (2004). Aboriginal economy and society:Australia at the threshold of colonisation.Melbourne, NY: Oxford University Press.

Mulvaney, J., & Johann, K. (1999). Prehistory ofAustralia. St. Leonards, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Rose, D. B. (1992). Dingo makes us human: Life andland in an aboriginal Australian culture.Cambridge, Melbourne: Cambridge UniversityPress.

4 AUSTRALOPITHECINES

Australopithecine is the informal adjective designatingmembers of the taxonomic subfamily Australop-ithecinae, which with the Homininae constitute thefamily Hominidae. The Hominidae are humans,human ancestors and collateral species after the

lineage branched from that leading to chimpanzees.Recently, paleontologists, influenced by evidencefrom genetics that apes and humans are more closelyrelated than traditional taxonomy reflected, havepulled African apes into the Hominidae, with reper-cussions right down the taxonomic scale. Under thenew scheme, gorillas are in the subfamily Gorillinaeand chimpanzees and humans are in the Homininae.The Homininae is divided into two tribes, the Paninifor chimpanzees and Hominini for our own lineage.Our tribe, the Hominini, is divided into two sub-tribes, the Australopithecina (less formally “australo-piths”) and the Hominina, which contains only thegenus Homo.

Except for specialists, the new taxonomy hardlyaffects the australopithecines. There is but a singledifference: “australopithecines” are now referred to as“australopiths.” The old and new schemes are given inthe table. Taxa in bold are discussed in this entry.

Australopiths as a group differ from chimpanzeesand other apes in possessing more robust, less pro-truding (i.e., more orthognathic) faces. Australopithmandibles lack a “simian shelf ” (a ridge of bonebehind the chin that joins the two sides of the jaw)and are more robust. Australopiths have a shallowersupratoral sulcus (groove behind the browridge) anda more caudally oriented nuchal plane (that is, theattachment of the neck muscles faces downward,reflecting a vertical spine). Australopith incisors areslightly smaller to much smaller than chimpanzees,molars and premolars are larger, dental enamelthicker to much thicker, and canine less projectingthough still roughly triangular. Whereas ape lowerfirst premolars have a sloping face that sharpens theback of the upper canine when the individual closesits mouth, australopith first premolars start out alittle more molarlike in early species and have lost allevidence of this honing shape by 2.5 million years ago(Ma). Australopith canines typically wear from thetip, rather than along a knife-like rear edge, as in apes.The robusticity of the skull is thought by many toreflect an adaptation to chewing more fibrous foods.Fruits in open habitats are less succulent and morefibrous than the fruits chimpanzees eat, and australo-piths likely also included fibrous underground stor-age organs in their diet.

Australopith skulls differ from those of Homo inhaving cranial capacities of less than 700 cc and usually< 600 cc. Australopiths have more prognathic (pro-truding) faces. All australopiths lack a true external

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AUSTRALOPITHECINES312

Traditional and Revised Ape and Human Taxonomy

Traditional TaxonomySuperfamily Hominoidea (apes and humans; informally “hominoids”)

Family Hylobatidae

Genus Hylobates

Family Pongidae (great apes; informally “pongids”)

Genus Pongo

Genus Gorilla

Genus Pan

Family Hominidae (humans and relatives; informally “hominids”)

Subfamily Australopithecinae (informally “australopithecines”)

Sahelanthropus, Orrorin, Ardipithecus, and Australopithecus (see below)

Subfamily Homininae (informally “hominines,” but rarely used)

Members of the genus Homo (more detail below)

Revised taxonomy

Superfamily Hominoidea (apes and humans; informally “hominoids”)

Family Hylobatidae

Genus Hylobates

Family Hominidae (great apes and humans; informally “hominids”)

Subfamily Ponginae

Pongo pygmaeus (orangutan)

Subfamily Gorillinae

Gorilla gorilla (gorilla)

Subfamily Homininae (chimpanzees and humans,“hominines”)

Tribe Panini (chimpanzees and bonobos; informally “panins”)

Pan paniscus

Pan troglodytes

Tribe Hominini (hominids in the old scheme; informally “hominins”)

Subtribe Australopithecina (informally “australopiths”)

Genus and Species Dates

Sahelanthropus tschadensis (6.5 Ma [6–7 Ma])Orrorin tugenensis (~6 Ma)Ardipithecus kadabba (5.8–5.2 Ma)Ardipithecus ramidus (4.4–4.2 Ma)Australopithecus anamensis (4.2–3.9 Ma)Australopithecus afarensis (3.6–2.9 Ma)synonym: Kenyanthropus platyopssynonym: Australopithecus bahrelghazaliAustralopithecus aethiopicus (2.3–2.7 Ma)Australopithecus boisei (1.4–2.3 Ma)Australopithecus africanus (2.5 Ma [2–3 Ma])Australopithecus garhi (~2.5 Ma)Australopithecus robustus (~1.9–1.5 Ma)Australopithecus “habilis” (1.9–1.4 Ma)

Subtribe Hominina (informally “homins”)

Homo habilis (OH 7 and ER 1470 e.g.)

Homo erectus (including “ergaster” and “antecessor”)

Homo sapiens (including “heidelbergensis” and “neanderthalensis”)

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


nose, but rather they quite resemble chimpanzees inthis feature. Aside from cranial capacity, the skulls ofearliest Homo, Homo habilis, as exemplified by ER1470 and OH 7, are quite like those of South Africanaustralopiths.

Postcranially, australopiths differ from chimpanzeesand vary in the direction of modern humans inhaving a large calcaneus (heel bone), a robust tibialplatform, a valgus femur, a quite humanlike pelvis, along lower back, short fingers, and longer, morepowerful thumbs.

Postcranially, australopiths differ from Homo andvary in the direction of chimpanzees in possessingbody weights of 25–60 kg, with males at the high end,females at the low. That is, australopiths were sexuallydimorphic, with females somewhere between one halfand three quarters of male body weight, versus 85%in humans. The long bones of australopiths weremore robust, that is, they have thicker walls thanthose of chimpanzees, which are in turn more robustthan humans. Australopiths had long curved toes,some gripping capacity of the big toe (perhaps withthe exception of A. robustus), the absence of the a ballof the foot (swelling at the base of the big toe), arobust peroneal groove of the fibula (suggesting agripping great toe), short legs, small femoral heads,small knee joints surface that are particularly smallfrom front to back, long arms with particularly longforearms, a robust lateral epicondylar crest on thehumerus (suggesting powerful elbow flexing), topo-graphically distinct elbows suggesting greater stabil-ity, curved robust fingers with concavities on theinner surface to accommodate large tendons to flexthe fingers, scapula or shoulder blade with tilted-upjoint surfaces, large joint surfaces above the waist andsmall joint surfaces below the waist, cone-shaped ribcages, ribs that are round in profile, and small verte-brae. These features suggest that australopiths werebipedal when walking on the ground but bore weightwith their arms more often during their daily routinethan do modern humans, presumably in trees.Australopith knee joints are less stable and havegreater flexibility than modern human knees. Humanknee joints are designed more for stability thanmobility; to accomplish this they are shaped so thatthe joint surfaces of the femur and tibia conformclosely. The round surface of the femoral joint surfacehas a concave or cup-shaped complement on thetibia. The knee of A. afarensis is more apelike, withthe tibial joint flat or even convex, so that it conforms

less closely to the round femoral joint surface, allowingmore mobility.

A number of australopith features are neitherchimpanzeelike nor humanlike. All the specimens wepossess show evidence of having six lumbar verte-brae, versus five in humans and four in great apes.The base of the great toe, far back in the foot, isunique. In humans, this joint is flat, making the bigtoe a relatively rigid strut. In chimpanzees, the joint isa modified ball-and-socket joint that allows mobilityin all planes—the great toe joint has the mobility ofthe human thumb. In A. afarensis the joint has ahingelike function, allowing the toe to swing side toside so as to allow the gripping of moderate-sizedobjects. As with a hinge, it is rigid in all other planesso that the great toe was as stiff in toe-off as that ofhumans. The pelvis, while human-shaped, is extraor-dinarily broad, with a birth canal that is quite widefrom side to side, not only broader than necessary togive birth but far broader than that. The femoralnecks are longer than those of humans or chim-panzees and more highly angled. The femur is valgus;that is, the femora angle inward, giving australopithsa distinct knock-kneed appearance, whereas apefemora have no such angle, yielding a rather bow-legged appearance. The australopith femur is not justvalgus, it is even more valgus than that of humans, ahyperhuman condition.

The wide pelvis and short femur have been inter-preted by Kevin Hunt as having evolved to lower thecenter of gravity, thereby increasing balance on unsta-ble substrates. The wide pelvis allows internal organsto ride lower in the body cavity, and short legs lowerthe center of mass still more. With short femora andlong femoral necks, the knees must angle in moreto reach the center of the body. Owen Lovejoy sug-gested that long femoral necks increase the mechani-cal advantage of muscles that stabilize the pelvis.These long necks are needed because the wide andunwieldy pelvis of australopiths requires more forceto stabilize, and long femoral necks give hip muscula-ture better leverage. The smaller angle of the femoralneck and the more valgus femur are insignificantconsequences of short legs. Imagine the letter Z as arather tall character. The upper horizontal representsthe femoral neck, the lower the knee. If the Z isshorter, as the femur is in australopiths, the angle thetop horizontal makes with the descending line istighter, and the descending line makes a greater anglewith the lower horizontal. The Z is more valgus.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


All australopith features considered togethersuggest a small robust-jawed, bipedal ape with con-siderable arboreal competence. Curved robust fingersfunction to reduce stress on the fingers during armhanging, and inferred large flexor tendons arerequired to grip branches during arm hanging. Shortfingers are an adaptation to foraging among smallbranches. Wide hips and short legs make balancingin trees easier. Tilted-up shoulder joints give chim-panzees and australopiths a cranial set to the shoul-der, meaning that they are more comfortable withtheir arms above their heads than at their sides, stress-ing the shoulder joint less during arm hanging. Cone-shaped torsos evenly distribute stress on the rib cageduring arm hanging. Long, curved lateral toes areused for gripping branches while collecting fruits intrees bipedally. A large calcaneus, dual-function greattoe, valgus femur, humanlike hips, and long femoralnecks suggest considerable terrestrial bipedal compe-tence. Their adaptation was likely that of eating fruitsin trees, supplemented with leaves and blossoms, andfalling back on underground storage organs (like car-rots or potatoes) during times of fruit scarcity. Giventheir small size and inferred arboreal competence,they likely slept in trees.

While these traits are rather consistent right throughthe lineage, each species has its peculiar adaptations.

Sahelanthropus Tschadensis (6.5 Ma [6–7 Ma])

Sahelanthropus is represented by a well-preservedskull and fragments from at least six individuals.Not surprisingly, this earliest (purported) homininhas the smallest australopith cranial capacity, 350 cc.The brow ridge is similar in shape to that of later aus-tralopiths in lacking a chimpanzeelike depressionor groove behind the browridge, but the brow isunusually thick. The zygomatics or cheek bones ofSahelanthropus recede from the face so that the centerof the face is more prominent than the sides. Mostother australopiths have laterally prominent zygo-matics; in the more robust species, as one traces thezygomatics from the nasal opening toward the side ofthe face, they project ever farther forward, leaving thenose as the most depressed area on the face and theouter margins of the zygomatics the most prominent.Sahelanthropus lacks this dish-shaped face and hasmore receding but still robust zygomatics. The face isless prognathic than chimpanzees or later australop-iths, more like that of later australopithlike habilinessuch as ER 1813. Molars are smaller and tooth enamel

thinner than in A. afarensis and later australopiths,intermediate between them and chimpanzees. Theforamen magnum, the opening for the spinal cord, isplaced forward, and the neck muscles were orienteddownward, both evidence of bipedality. Though moreapelike than later australopiths, unlike apes thecanines wear at the tip, have only minor honing mor-phology on the lower premolar, and lack a spacebetween the canine and premolar. Some canines haveshoulders or basal tubercles, resembling the laterA. anamensis.

Orrorin Tugenensis (∼∼6 Ma)

There is no braincase or face for this species. Thereare, however, teeth from both the upper and lowerjaws and fragments of mandible. As with Sahelanthro-pus, the cheek teeth are smaller than later australop-iths. Dental enamel is thicker than that in eitherSahelanthropus or the later Ardipithecus. A humerus isunremarkable and like other australopiths. A fingerbone is curved, or typical for an australopith. Mostremarkable is the femur, for which there are twospecimens, one rather complete. The femoral headis small and the femoral neck long compared tohumans, but both are more humanlike than they arein A. afarensis. The angle of the femoral neck is great,though this trait is ambiguous since it is shared byhumans and chimpanzees. This upward orientationreduces the effective femoral neck length. Longfemoral necks offset the stresses of a very wide pelvis,and low shaft-neck angles in most australopiths areinterpreted as related to more valgus femora, which isin turn a consequence of short legs. Chimpanzeeshave short legs, but because they do not walk upright,they have neither the valgus femur, the tight angleof the neck, nor the long femoral neck of australop-iths. The morphology of Orrorin therefore suggeststhat if it is a biped, its pelvis is narrow, its legs arelong, or both. Although other features are humanlike,interpretation is complicated by short femoral necksand upward-angled necks in chimpanzees. Althoughunlikely, it is possible Orrorin is not a biped.

Ardipithecus Kadabba (5.2–5.8 Ma)

The species is defined by fragments of a mandible,clavicle, ulna, and humerus. All are quite similar toearlier and later hominins. A complete toe bone andfragments of hand phalanges are curved, robust, andindistinguishable from other australopiths. Loose teethinclude incisors, canines, premolars, and molars.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


Canines differ in some minor details from other earlyhominins and retain some elements of a canine/P3honing complex that sharpens the back side of apeupper canines. This feature is variable in earlyhominins, leaving the A. kadabba similar to otherspecies. The cheek teeth are the size of other earlyhominins, if not slightly larger. The cheek teeth haveslightly thicker enamel than Sahelanthropus, Orrorin,and the later A. ramidus.

Ardipithecus Ramidus (4.2–4.4 Ma)

The cheek teeth of A. ramidus are small—as areother early australopiths—but are largely withinthe range of the later A. afarensis. The enamel isintermediate between chimpanzees and A. afarensis.The canines are similar to A. afarensis but slightlymore chimpanzeelike. Postcrania have not yet beendescribed, but are said to differ in significant waysfrom A. afarensis. Perhaps they resemble Orrorin.

Australopithecus Anamensis (3.9–4.2 Ma)

This species has many more specimens than earlieraustralopiths. The canines, though within the rangeof A. afarensis, can be placed between Ardipithecusand A. afarensis in a graded series from slightly chim-panzeelike to less chimpanzeelike. As in Sahelanthro-pus, some canines have shoulders or basal tuberclesthat are uncommon in A. afarensis. The mandible isquite robust, but the left and right cheek teeth rowsare parallel to one another, as is the case in chim-panzees, whereas A. afarensis has slightly divergenttooth rows. In profile the chin is straighter and morereceding than that of A. afarensis or the earlierSahelanthropus. Cheek teeth are the size of A. afaren-sis, but the deciduous molars and premolars are dis-tinctly smaller and more apelike. That is, adults arelike later species, juveniles like earlier species.Specimens discovered earlier had more verticallyimplanted upper canines than A. afarensis, but laterfinds differ less. This species has a smaller and there-fore more apelike ear opening than later hominins,though this feature likely varies more than appreci-ated at first. The postcranial skeletal elements areindistinguishable from A. afarensis.

Australopithecus Afarensis (2.9–3.6 Ma)

A. afarensis is the exemplar of early hominins, asdescribed above. Its zygomatics protrude forwardlaterally more than Sahelanthropus but less than thelater A. africanus. Cranial capacity is near 400 cc, the

slightest of increases from 350 cc in Sahelanthropus.Canines and first lower premolars are more apelikecharacters than later australopiths, but the traitvaries, with some individuals apelike, and others notat all. Incisors are smaller and cheek teeth largerthan early australopiths. Enamel is thick. This speciesalone of the early hominins discussed so far givesus information on rib cage shape, base of great toemorphology, pelvic shape, arm-to-leg-length com-parisons, calcaneus (heel) shape, scapula shape, andsexual dimorphism.

Australopithecus Aethiopicus (2.7–2.3 Ma)

This robust australopith was a shock when it wasdiscovered in the mid-1980s. It combines enormouscheek teeth with incisors and canines that are unre-duced from the presumably ancestral A. afarensiscondition. Although the lateral zygomatics are soprominent the face is dished, the face is as prognathic(protruding) as any previous australopith, if notmore so, and is quite apelike. The preserved skull hasa crest on the top, a condition present when chewingmuscles are larger than the area of the braincase canaccommodate. Previously, large cheek teeth had beenexpected in species that specialized on grinding,which meant small incisors and retracted faces. Inlife, the species presumably subsisted on piths, roots,and seeds. Its cranial capacity is 400 cc, the same asA. afarensis. Large incisors and prognathic faces areinterpreted as adaptations to stripping or pulling thehard outer layer off piths. Postcrania are unknown.

Australopithecus Boisei (2.3–1.4 Ma)

The most classic of robust australopithecines has,compared to its presumed ancestor A. aethiopicus,smaller incisors and canines, a bizarrely robustmandible, and a considerably more orthognathic(pulled-back) face. The main chewing muscle, tem-poralis, is more vertical and larger anteriorly, pre-sumably oriented to maximize chewing power andendurance. The small incisors suggest that strippingwas not significant, that food items were small, or atleast small before they entered the mouth. There areno known postcranial bones.

Australopithecus Africanus (2.5 Ma [2–3 Ma])

Long the prototype for australopiths, this speciesfrom South Africa was first named by Raymond Dartin 1925. It varies from A. afarensis in some of thesame ways A. boisei varies from A. aethiopicus.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM


Compared to A. afarensis, its incisors are smaller andits cheek teeth larger. The canine has lost nearly allape features, and resembles the incisors. Studies ofwear on the teeth suggest that A. africanus was a fruiteater that supplemented its diet with pith, leaves,and seeds. Cranial capacity is 450 cc, or still quiteapelike. The face is more dished than A. afarensis,and exhibits canine pillars, ridges that pass from thecanines up to either side of the nose, and are believedto reinforce the face from the forces of chewing.Whatever their function, such reinforcements are notfound in A. afarensis, despite its robust mandible andlarge cheek teeth. Postcranially, A. africanus haslonger arms and shorter legs than A. afarensis, and ascapula that is quite apelike, probably more apelikethan Lucy. The pelvis is broad but not quite as broadas that of Lucy. A. africanus retains all other featuresof the hand, arm, legs, and feet found in A. afarensis.That is, it is a terrestrial biped and an arboreal armhanger/biped.

Australopithecus Garhi (∼∼2.5 Ma)

A. garhi has a robust face like that of other non-robust australopiths, a more projecting jaw thantypical. Molars and premolars are huge, of A. boiseiproportions. Canines are very broad and appear tofunction as premolars. An associated femur fragmentis suggested by the discoverers to suggest the hindlimbs are long for an australopith, though nothumanlike. The claim is controversial because theforearm is also extraordinarily long (perhaps indicat-ing that the individual is merely large, rather thanpossessing humanlike limb proportions), the femur isincomplete and its length therefore uncertain, andthere is no comparable male complete femur forA. afarensis to compare. Other postcrania are similarto those of other australopiths. Cranial capacity isestimated at 450 cc, or at the A. africanus mean. Itsdiscoverers argue that nearby tools and cut markedanimal bone belong to A. garhi, suggesting it is in theHomo lineage. Others argue it is a unique offshootunrelated to later hominins.

Australopithecus Robustus (∼∼1.5–1.9 Ma)

This South African species appears to have evolvedfrom A. africanus, and it differs from it as A. boiseidiffers from A. afarensis. Despite facial similarity toA. boisei, studies suggest it had a different growth pat-tern, and its teeth are dramatically smaller. Its closest

relative was more likely A. africanus than A. boisei.Compared to A. africanus, it has a more dished face,smaller incisors, larger molars, more vertical chewingmuscles, a more robust face, larger zygomatics, andthe presence of a sagittal crest to anchor huge chew-ing muscles. Cranial capacity is reported at 475 cc.Since Homo also occurs at the same site, postcranialattributions are difficult. However, most craniodentalfossils are A. robustus, meaning postcranials probablyare too. The femoral head and neck and pelvic frag-ments are much like A. afarensis and A. africanus.Fingers are straight, less robust, and fingertips arebroad, all as in humans; the elbow joint is not topo-graphically distinct, suggesting it less often bore bodyweight. The toes are much more humanlike thanA. afarensis and A. africanus.

Australopithecus “Habilis” (1.4–1.9 Ma)

A number of specimens in East Africa are too smallto be Homo but have been pooled with Homo habilisfor want of a better solution. The type specimen of H.habilis is OH 7, which has a cranial capacity of700–750 cc, or similar to that of ER 1470 at 780 cc. IfER 1470 is the same species as OH 7, which the cra-nial capacity and other features suggest, H. habilisretained the large teeth and flat face of its australopithforebears. Often associated with ER 1470 is a longER 1472 femur, as long as that of later humans. Theselarge-bodied, robust-faced, large-brained homininsmay have evolved into Homo erectus. Persisting dur-ing the time of both H. habilis and H. erectus are fos-sils of a smaller-brained, smaller-toothed, often moredelicate-faced species. Some skulls are quite similarto A. africanus, particularly OH 24 with its distinctcanine pillars and flat face. Others, for example, ER1813, have reduced zygomatics and the first hint of anexternal nose. Their cranial capacities range from 500to 600 cc. Similar to these is another small specimen,OH 62. This specimen has postcrania that display theclassic australopith features associated with a partlyarboreal lifeway. Because most paleontologists placedthese fossils in H. habilis, they have no official speciesname of their own. All are too small to be in the genusHomo, but they are different enough that they mayultimately be placed in more than one species. Fornow, they are left as the still-australopith-like lasthangers-on of the glorious australopith tradition thatbegan 6.5 Ma and ends with the extinction of A.“habilis” and A. boisei at 1.4 Ma.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AXES, HAND 317

To simplify, australopiths can be divided intoroughly seven groups based on current knowledge.Sahelanthropus, Orrorin, and early Ardipithecus are allfragmentary, all share somewhat small cheek teeth,somewhat large incisors, somewhat thin enamel, andmore apelike canine/lower premolar honing complexthan later australopiths. They may be all closelyrelated, and in fact one describer of Ardipithecus kad-abba has suggested that they all belong to a singlespecies. If so, all were bipedal in a way that is signifi-cantly different from the bipedalism of later hominins.We can add Ardipithecus ramidus to this group andlabel them Poorly Known Early Probable australop-iths (PKEPs).

PKEPs likely gave rise to a second group, the A.anamensis and A. afarensis lineage, which are similarenough to one another to suggest they are a single,evolving lineage. Compared to PKEPs, they havelarger cheek teeth, thicker enamel, smaller incisors,and less apelike canines.

Presumably branching off the A. anamensis/afarensis lineage was an East African lineage thatevolved a more robust face, more muscular jaws, andmuch larger cheek teeth very rapidly, and then slowlyevolved smaller incisors and a more retracted face.This group began with A. aethiopicus at 2.7 Ma,evolved into A. boisei near 2.3 Ma, and persisted wellinto the reign of Homo erectus, going extinct only at1.4 Ma and perhaps even later.

In South Africa a descendent of A. afarensisevolved slightly larger cheek teeth, slightly smallerincisors, and slightly more reinforced faces. A.africanus not only retained all the apelike charactersof Lucy, but likely even converged on apes slightly,evolving longer arms and shorter legs. A. africanushad a South African robust offshoot, A. robustus, thatevolved even more robust faces. Despite a superficialresemblance to A. boisei, evidence suggests it grewdifferently than A. boisei, and its molars are consid-erably smaller, suggesting it is not related to the EastAfrican robusts.

In East Africa at 2.5 Ma, A. garhi shows only equiv-ocal evidence of more humanlike postcrania, and itsspecialized teeth leave its role in human evolutionambiguous. The last hanger-on among the australop-iths was the variable A. “habilis.” It retained smallbrains and more apelike bodies and persisted until1.4 million years ago.

— Kevin D. Hunt

Further Readings

Conroy, G. C. (2005). Reconstructing human origins.New York: W. W. Norton.

Johanson, D. C., & Edey, M. (1981). Lucy: Thebeginnings of humankind. New York: Simon &Schuster.

Johanson, D., & Edgar, B. (1996). From Lucy tolanguage. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Meier, R. J. (2003). The complete idiot’s guide to humanprehistory. New York: Alpha Books.

Wood, B. (2005). Human evolution: A very shortintroduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

4 AXES, HAND

Hand axes are an artifact type most frequently associ-ated with the Acheulean culture of the LowerPaleolithic or the Early Stone Age. Hand axes arelarge, bifacially flaked cores. Typically, they are ovate,tear-drop shaped, almandine, or circular, and rangefrom 10 cm to 20 cm in length. Rarely, specimens mayreach significantly larger size ranges. Another fre-quent variant of the hand axe is the so-called cleaver.This variant is also bifacial flaked but is shaped inorder to form a squared edge on at least one end.Hand axes are frequently made on large flakes, such asthose removed from boulder cores in various regions.In addition, they are often manufactured from largecobbles or nodules of raw material.

The presence of this unique and distinctive artifacttype is used almost exclusively as a marker of theAcheulean culture, which dates from around 1.6 myto 200 ky. Despite this, basic bifaces with aggressivehard hammer flaking are also present in the Oldowanindustry and may be as old as the earliest stone toolassemblages. In addition, hand axes persist in somestone tool traditions significantly after the end of theAcheulean time range. For example, hand axes persistdeep into the Middle Paleolithic of Europe.

John Frere is credited as the first author to formallydiscuss the archaeology of hand axes, writing in1797 concerning the English site of Hoxne. For earlyarchaeologists, the distinctive appearance facilitatedthe recognition of these stone tools as human-madeartifacts. Jacques Boucher de Perthes, while excavat-ing at the Acheulean type-site of Saint-Acheul on theSomme River of France, was the first to coin the term

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AXES, HAND318

“hand axe,” and recognize them as a formal categoryof stone tools. In addition, Boucher de Perthes’srecognition of hand axes in association with extinctanimal species was instrumental in establishing theantiquity of humans as a species. The recognition ofhand axes as human-made stone tools was vital forthe recognition of the archaeological remains of the restof the Paleolithic and matched archaeology with therapid pace of paleontological discovery. Subsequentdiscoveries of hand axes in Africa and Asia showedboth their spatial and temporal ubiquity.

Hand axes are found in almost all of the temperateOld World, with the possible exception of tropicalforest zones and hyperarid regions. Until recently,hand axes were not thought to be present in SoutheastAsia, which was instead thought to be divided fromEurope and the Near East by the so-called MoviusLine, named for Harvard prehistorian Hallam Movius.Recent discoveries in Southeast Asia have called thisconventional understanding into question.

The most noteworthy and debated feature of handaxes is their persistence over almost the entire courseof the Pleistocene. Over the course of the Achueleanculture, hand axes gradually become thinner andmore refined, incorporating technological advancessuch as soft hammer flake removal and core platformpreparation. However, the general shape of hand axesremains extremely constant over time. This is the caseboth within individual sites that contain records oflong periods of time and more generally across the OldWorld in prehistory. Hand axes from Africa, Europe,and Asia, throughout the span of the Acheulean, shareremarkably consistent sets of properties. The persis-tence of the Acheulean hand axe represents a sub-stantial research problem, with numerous proposedexplanations. These possibilities include inheritedbiological programming for hand axe manufacture,sexual signaling using hand axes, cultural instructionof offspring by parents for the production of handaxes, or simply the functional unity of an effectivetechnological design, which was invented and utilizedinnumerable times in prehistory. The explanations aretoo numerous to list here, and there is extremely littleconsensus concerning this problem.

The function of hand axes is also a frequentlydebated topic. Boucher de Perthes and other earlyresearchers often suggested that hand axes werehafted, similar to modern axes. There is no evidencefor this, however. Currently, there is a sizable set offrequently mentioned possible functions for hand

axes: butchery, woodworking, digging, projectileweaponry, stylized core for flake production, andmany more. There is certainly no consensus concern-ing function, although butchery is probably the mostwidely accepted. In addition, most current researchtends to see unmodified flakes as sharper and there-fore more effective cutting tools than hand axes. Thisnotion has built more support for hand axes assources for useful flakes, especially since bifacial flak-ing is an effective strategy for maximizing the outputof useful flakes from a core. The most likely explana-tion, and perhaps the reason for the remarkable dura-tion of hand axes as a phenomenon in prehistory, isthat hand axes were extremely flexible technologicalobjects and were used for most, if not all, of the func-tions offered above.

Hand axes have frequently tempted researchers intodeep speculation. On the one hand, these unique anddistinctive artifacts would seem to offer clues into vitalareas of inquiry, such as hominid cognition, language,social structure and cultural transmission, subsis-tence, population history and movement, and a hostof others. However, despite the immense number ofcases from which data have been collected, there areextremely few questions concerning hand axes thathave been answered unambiguously. It seems unlikelythat any simple or easy answers are likely to come. Inaddition, modern archaeology has become wary ofstone tool typology as an analytical technique andtherefore less comfortable with research solely concern-ing hand axes. A more concerted effort is being made tosee the variability among hand axes and their context asan aspect of the variability of Paleolithic stone toolassemblages. Still, hand axes represent a fascinating andpuzzling research problem that will no doubt engagethe interest of investigators long into the future.

— Grant S. McCall

Further Readings

Deacon, H. J., & Deacon, J. (1999). Human beginningsin South Africa: Uncovering the secrets of the StoneAge. Cape Town: David Philip.

Klein, R. G. (1999). The human career: Humanbiological and cultural origins. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.

Schick, K. D., & Toth, N. (1993). Making silent stonesspeak: Human evolution and the dawn oftechnology. New York: Simon & Schuster.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AYMARA 319

4 AYMARA

The Aymara are an indigenous ethnic group ofBolivia and Peru, who occupy the high altiplanoregion surrounding Lake Titicaca. In Bolivia, theAymara number nearly 2 million, comprising a quar-ter of the national population, and their concentra-tion in and around La Paz gives Bolivia’s capital city adistinctly Aymara flavor. Another 350,000 Aymaralive in Peru and some 20,000 in northern Chile. TheChilean Aymara have mostly lost their ancestral lan-guage but it is still widely spoken in Bolivia and (toa lesser degree) Peru. Nevertheless, the language canbe considered endangered, inasmuch as most speak-ers today are bilingual, and many bilinguals raise theirchildren as Spanish monolinguals. Traditionally anagricultural people, many Aymara have moved tourban centers in recent decades, with the accompany-ing cultural assimilation and language loss character-istic of such situations. Many have also migrated toArgentina in search of employment.

Between AD 400 and 1000, Aymara civilization cen-tered on the ancient city of Tiahuanaco (Tiwanaku), thecapital of an empire that extended from the westerncoastal desert to the humid slopes of the eastern Andes.After long-term drought led to the empire’s collapse,the Aymara (aka Collas) comprised a dozen indepen-dent chiefdoms, which were incorporated into the Incaempire during the 15th cen-tury. Due to centuries ofcontact, there are deep par-allels between Aymara andQuechua language andculture. The traditionalsubsistence/tribute economywas based on potatoes andother tubers, high-altitudegrains such as quinua, andcamelids (llama and alpaca),today largely replaced bysheep. Extensive marketingnetworks between differ-ent ecological zones existedfor many centuries beforeEuropean contact.

Traditional Aymara socialorganization varies by regionbut typically consists ofmonogamous, patrilineal,

extended-family households. The compadrazgo systemof fictive kinship is widespread and essential to socialand economic life. Compadrazgo ties may be hori-zontal (between equals) or vertical (crossing classstrata and ethnic boundaries). Some communitiesobserve the classical civil-religious hierarchy orcargo system, which is formally restricted to men butactually based on conjugal pairs. Communities aregrouped into ayllus, headed by an informal councilof elders (amautas). Most Aymara are nominallyCatholic, with considerable syncretism from earth-centered indigenous religion, but Protestantism isspreading among the Aymara, as throughout LatinAmerica.

Aymara society was drastically disrupted bySpanish colonization. Many communities were dis-possessed of their lands and forced into feudalarrangements with European landowners, or enslavedin the region’s rich silver and tin mines. However,many communities were able to maintain their cul-ture relatively intact, due to their remote and arduoushigh-altitude habitat. The Bolivian land reform of1953 brought much land back under Aymara control,but drought, low prices, and increasing land pressurehave driven many out of agriculture and into thecities. Today, integration into the cash economy andnational institutions is more the rule than the excep-tion; the urban proletariat of La Paz is predominantlyAymara. At the same time, increased opportunities

Source: ©Reuters/CORBIS.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AZTEC AGRICULTURE320

for social mobility have given rise to a significantnumber of Aymara professionals (including socialscientists). Even Bolivia’s overwhelmingly nonindige-nous Parliament now contains some Aymara (andQuechua) deputies. Victor Hugo Cárdenas, Bolivia’svice president from 1993 to 1997, is Aymara.

— Aurolyn Luykx

See also Peru

Further Readings

Eagen, J. (2002). The Aymara of South America.Minneapolis, MN: Lerner.

Hardman, M. J. (Ed.). (1981). The Aymara language inits social and cultural context: Essays on aspects ofAymara language and culture. Gainesville:University Presses of Florida.

Kolata, A. L. (1996). Valley of the spirits: A journey intothe lost realm of the Aymara. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

4 AZTEC AGRICULTURE

Some of the most impressive technological achieve-ments of ancient Mesoamerican societies involvedincreases in the scale, efficiency, and overall productiv-ity of agricultural land use systems. In late pre-Hispanictimes, Mesoamerican farmers devised creative ways tomeet the subsistence demands of burgeoning pop-ulations. Their solutions, which included terracing,irrigation, and raised fields, produced more foodper unit of land than traditional farming methods.Anthropologists describe this process as “agriculturalintensification,” which appears in many cases to coe-volve alongside population growth and political cen-tralization in the development of complex societies.

Agricultural intensification was a key economicprocess in the growth and development of the Aztecempire, which occupied highland central Mexico fromthe early 14th through the early 16th centuries AD.How the Aztec empire fed the large population of itscapital, Tenochtitlan, has long intrigued researchers,since most of the city’s estimated 250,000 inhabitantsat the time of Spanish contact in 1519 were not foodproducers. Feeding the residents of Tenochtitlan andother urban places in the region was primarily the jobof rural farmers. Agricultural intensification and

exploitation of locally available resources providedthese farmers with a mixed economy that ensuredlocal prosperity, while supplying urban areas withcritically important staple goods and raw materials.

Capitalizing on the mosaic of microenvironmentsafforded by the Basin of Mexico, Aztec farmers com-bined three distinct farming techniques: terraced hill-slopes irrigated by spring water that was carried longdistances through complex networks of aqueducts,dry-farming fields watered by rain or alluvial flooding,and raised fields constructed as long rectangular plotsin swamps and shallow lakebeds. These techniqueswere sometimes combined and supplemented withother methods, such as intercropping and fertilizing.This work, which took place year-round, producedvery high yields of corn, beans, squash, fruits, chilies,chia, amaranth, and some species of cactus, all ofwhich circulated widely in periodic community mar-kets and in the Great Marketplace at Tlatelolco near thecapital. In addition to providing daily sustenance, thesestaples were used in other ways in Aztec society, such asto mark social identity and hierarchy during politicalfeasts, to pay tribute in support of the Aztec politicaleconomy, and to conduct religious rituals.

Agrotechnologies

One of the greatest challenges for Aztec farmers was thepoor condition of highland soils and the lack of arableland. Multiple agrotechnologies were brought togetherto address these problems. To improve soil quality, Aztecfarmers left certain fields fallow for a period of time, andthen used slash-and-burn techniques, in which treeswere cut down, left to dry, and then set on fire; theresulting ash added nutrients to the soil. To increase theamount of cultivatable terrain, Aztec farmers built ter-races along piedmont hillslopes. These terraces, madeout of walls of stones, allowed farmers to use more landon the slopes and to move farther up the hillsides thanotherwise possible. However, only a limited range ofcrops could be cultivated on these terraces due to thethin and rocky nature of upland soils. Plus, crops wereusually dependent upon available rainwater, whichmade them susceptible to destruction by drought orheavy runoff from summer rainstorms. To buffer therisk of low productivity from terraced fields,Aztec farm-ers also created plots of land called chinampas (from theAztec term, chinamitl, meaning “square made of cane”),artificial raised fields constructed in swamps and shal-low lakebeds from layers of mud and vegetation.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AZTEC AGRICULTURE 321

Chinampas, which covered some 9,500 hectares(about 23,500 acres) in the basin’s two southernlakes, Xochimilco and Chalco, represented a highlyproductive form of intensive agriculture that pro-vided up to one half or more of the food consumed inTenochtitlan. In its most intensive form, cultivationwas continuous throughout the year, producing twoto four crops that yielded an annual surplus of 16,500metric tons of corn. Fields were never left fallow;as soon as one crop was harvested, another set ofseedlings was put in place. Scarce land was thus nottied up by long-cycle crops growing from seed. When-ever corn was cultivated, ground-hugging cultivars,such as beans and squash, were planted betweenthe rows. Intercropping of this sort helped to keepsoil nutrients in balance, since root action and silageof the bushier plants returned to the earth the miner-als consumed by corn.

Modern aerial surveys show an overall uniformityin chinampa size and orientation, indicating a plannedprogram of construction. Plots were rectangularfields 2 to 4 m wide (roughly 7 to 12 feet) and 20 to40 m long (roughly 65 to 130 feet), surrounded onthree or four sides by canals. Each plot was bordered byreeds, forming a fence around the plot, which was filledin with mud and decaying vegetation to raise the fieldsurface just above the water level. The proximity of thefield surface to the water table provided adequate soilmoisture for crops and improved nighttime tempera-tures, reducing the chance of frosts. Soil fertility wasmaintained by periodically adding vegetation, house-hold refuse, organic rich silt dredged up from the canalbottoms, and sometimes human excrement. The longand narrow layout between parallel canals, low profileabove water, and layering of specific soil types obviatedthe constant need for irrigation.

Cultigens

The 16th-century Franciscan missionary, Bernardino deSahagún, compiled an account of Aztec daily life fromnative informants, entitled “Historia general de las cosasde Nueva España,” which included an extraordinarilydetailed narrative of cultivated plants and how they wereused. These plants included corn, chia, and amaranth, aswell as abundant varieties of beans, squashes, fruits, andchilies, all of which were farmed with a single kind ofmultipurpose digging stick known as the uictli.

The principal crop of Aztec farming was corn or“maize” (centli), which played an intimate part of the

everyday lives of the Aztec. Maize was a central elementto many stories, poems, and songs, as well as creationmyths (the gods were said to have fashioned cornmealinto human flesh). Maize was prepared in numerousways. The ear was consumed, the fiber was used fortea, maize honey was made from the tender canes, thefungus (cuitlacoche) was cooked and eaten, and thedry grains were used as the base for making tortillas,tamales, and a variety of gruel drinks. Atoles (atolli)were drinks made with maize dough mixed withwater and sweetened with some kind of syrup ormade spicy with the addition of chili. Pozol (pozolli)was a nutritious meal, taken as a drink prepared withnixtamal (boiled corn kernels in water with lime) andhoney, chocolate, or dry chilies. A similar drink, yola-tolli, was used as a curative for fever and some diseases.

Along with maize, beans were often served withmeals and also included as ingredients in otherdishes, such as tamales. Chia (chiematl) and amaranth(huauhtli) were used like maize in making pozol, andamaranth seeds were sometimes mixed with maizefor making tamales. Cakes of amaranth seed doughwere used in some religious ceremonies to adornidols. There were more than one hundred varietiesof chili peppers (chilli), which were mostly usedto season foods, but some were eaten fresh, dehy-drated, or smoked and pickled. The many varieties ofsquashes and fruits were eaten raw or cooked. Somespecies of flower—bishop’s weed, may flower, andzucchini flower—were cooked and used to preparesoups and teas.

Second only to maize, chocolate (chocolatl or xoxo-latl) and cotton (ichcatl) were essential to both subsis-tence and political economies. Chocolate beans(cacao) sometimes served as a form of currency, espe-cially for use in market exchange, where it was com-monly accepted as payment for merchandise andlabor. Writing in the mid-16th century, the Spanishpriest and historian Bartolomé de las Casas notedthat one strip of pine bark for kindling was worth fivecacao beans and one turkey egg cost three beans.Chocolate drink (ground, toasted cacao beans mixedwith water and sometimes sweetened with honey ormaguey syrup) was a prestigious beverage, reservedfor people of high rank and consumed during specialmeals. Like chocolate, cotton was usually reservedfor nobility; the woven fibers were often considereda prestige clothing of the elite. Cotton cloaks alsoappear to have had exchange value as currency.Depending on the quality, one cloak was said to be

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

AZTEC AGRICULTURE322

worth from 65 to 300 cacao beans. Unlike maize,however, cacao and cotton were grown outside theBasin of Mexico, including Morelos and the coastalregions of Veracruz and Oaxaca, and transported tothe basin by means of trade and tribute.

Two types of cactus were cultivated, prickly pear(nopal) and agave or “maguey” (mexcalmetl). Thesesucculents were important dietary supplements, espe-cially in areas with low rainfall. Nopal and magueywere cultivated using dry-farming techniques, inwhich available rainfall was usually sufficient forwatering crops. Nopal was roasted and eaten as avegetable or served in tamales. The nopal plant alsoprovided fruit (nochtli), which was consumed raw.Maguey provided medicine, fiber, building material,fuel, fertilizer, and intoxicating beverages. The mostcommon fermented drinks were mezcal (metl) andpulque (poliuhqui). Pulque was usually reserved forconsumption as a curative and on ceremonial occa-sions, including harvest festivals, rainmaking rituals,birth ceremonies, marriages, and funerals.

Agrarian Ritual

The Aztec considered the complementary themes ofrain/moisture, maize and maguey, and agriculturalfertility to be crucial to life-sustaining cosmologicalforces. As such, all agricultural practices were regu-lated by a calendrical system and a ritual almanac.The creator gods, Cipactonal and Oxomoco, createdtime in order to organize and plan earthly and divinephenomena and to give them sequence. Earthly timewas organized according to the solar year (xiuitl),which was divided into 18 months of 20 days, plus5 “unlucky” days (nemontemi). A great deal of theAztec’s time and energy was devoted to ceremoniesthroughout the 18 months, most of which was aimedat placating deities of rain and agricultural fertility.These ceremonies coincided with the most criticalperiods in the agricultural cycle: the primary plant-ing, growing, and harvesting seasons.

Divine time was structured by a ritual calendar(tonalpohualli), which consisted of 13 periods of 20days each, creating a 260 count of days that were eachassociated with ceremonial observances. Each 13-dayperiod was presided over by a patron deity or deities,including Tlaloc (god of rain) and other gods associatedwith fertility and agriculture, such as Xipe Totec (godof spring and new vegetation), Chicomecoatl (god-dess of foodstuffs, especially maize and sustenance),

Cinteotl (god of maize), and Xilonen (goddess oftender young maize). Each of the 20 days in the periodalso had a patron deity, who imparted special attrib-utes to these days. For example, the patron of the rabbit(tochtli) days was Mayahuel, goddess of maguey, whopresided over drinking and drunkenness.

The anthropological significance of Aztec agricul-ture is revealed in the Aztecs’ intensive and highlydiversified agroeconomic system that stimulated spe-cialization in areas of food production. Farmers in thedrier reaches of the northern part of the basin special-ized in nopal and maguey cultivation, while those inthe south took advantage of a wetter climate for maizeand bean agriculture; lowland farmers focused oncacao and cotton. Exchange between these regionssometimes enabled staple goods to be used to createand acquire durable valuables that could be amassedand redistributed as loans or gifts for building andenhancing social status and prestige. The Aztec agri-cultural system also yielded enormous surpluses offoods that enabled urban dwellers to focus their timeand energy on non-food-producing enterprises, suchas religious observances, governmental services, craftmanufacture, and military duty. In this way, intensiveagriculture and surplus production were extremelyimportant factors in the development of Aztec society.

— E. Christian Wells

See also Agriculture, Intensive

Further Readings

Evans, S. T. (1992). The productivity of magueyterrace agriculture in Central Mexico during theAztec period. In T. W. Killion (Ed.), Gardens ofprehistory: The archaeology of settlement agriculturein greater Mesoamerica (pp. 92–115). Tuscaloosa:University of Alabama Press.

McClung de Tapia, E. (2000). Prehispanic agriculturalsystems in the basin of Mexico. In D. L. Lentz(Ed.), Imperfect balance: Landscape transformationsin the pre-Columbian Americas (pp. 121–146).New York: Columbia University Press.

Nichols, D. L., & Frederick, C. D. (1993). Irrigationcanals and chinampas: The development ofhydraulic agriculture in the northern basin ofMexico. In V. Scarborough & B. L. Isaac (Eds.),Economic aspects of water management in theprehispanic new world (pp. 123–150). Greenwich,CT: JAI Press.

A-Birx-4715.qxd 8/26/2005 5:17 PM

4 ABORIGINES - Sage Publications

Documents

Transcript of 4 ABORIGINES - Sage Publications