Difference between revisions of "Anthropology" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
(Added footer)
m
(46 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Anthropology]]
 
[[Category:Anthropology]]
 +
{{Copyedited}}{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}
 +
[[File:Initiation ritual of boys in Malawi.jpg|right|330px|thumb|Initiation rite of the [[Yao]] people of [[Malawi]]]]
 +
'''Anthropology''' (from the [[Greek language|Greek]] word ''{{polytonic|ἄνθρωπος}}'', "human" or "person") consists of the study of humanity (see genus ''[[Homo]]''). The discipline is a holistic study, concerned with all humans, at all times, in all humanity's dimensions. Anthropology is traditionally distinguished from other disciplines by its emphasis on cultural relativity, in-depth examination of context, and cross-cultural comparisons.
  
'''Anthropology''' (from the [[Greek language|Greek]] word ''άνθρωπος'', "human") consists of the study of [[Human|humankind]] (see genus ''[[Homo (genus)|Homo]]''). It is [[holism|holistic]] in two senses: it is concerned with all humans at all times, and with all dimensions of humanity.  A primary trait that traditionally distinguished anthropology from other humanistic disciplines is an emphasis on cross-cultural comparisons. This distinction has, however, become increasingly the subject of controversy and debate, with anthropological methods now being commonly applied in single society/group studies.      
+
Anthropology is methodologically diverse, using both qualitative and quantitative methods, such as firsthand case studies of living [[culture]]s, careful excavations of material remains, and interpretations of both living and extinct [[linguistics|linguistic]] practices. In [[North America]] and other Western cultures, anthropology is traditionally broken down into four main divisions: [[physical anthropology]], [[archaeology]], [[cultural anthropology]] (also known as social anthropology), and [[linguistic anthropology]]. Each sub-discipline uses different techniques, taking different approaches to study [[human being]]s at all points in time. Through bringing together the results of all these endeavors humans can hope to better understand themselves, and learn to live in harmony, fulfilling their potential as individuals and societies, taking care of each other and the earth that is their home.
  
In the [[United States]], ''''''anthropology'''''' is traditionally divided into four sub-disciplines:
+
==Historical and institutional context==
* [[physical anthropology]], which studies [[primatology|primate behavior]], [[human evolution]], and [[population genetics]]; this field is also sometimes called [[biological anthropology]].
+
{{readout|The anthropologist [[Eric Wolf]] once described anthropology as "the most scientific of the humanities, and the most humanistic of the sciences."|left}} Anthropology can best be understood as an outgrowth of the [[Age of Enlightenment]], a period when Europeans attempted to study human behavior systematically. The traditions of [[jurisprudence]], [[history]], [[philology]], and [[sociology]] then evolved into something more closely resembling the modern views of these disciplines and informed the development of the [[social sciences]], of which anthropology was a part. At the same time, the [[romanticism|romantic]] reaction to the Enlightenment produced thinkers, such as [[Johann Gottfried Herder]] and later [[Wilhelm Dilthey]], whose work formed the basis for the "culture concept," which is central to the discipline.
* [[cultural anthropology]], (called [[social anthropology]] in the [[United Kingdom]] and now often known as [[socio-cultural anthropology]]). Areas studied by cultural anthropologists include social networks, [[diffusion (anthropology)|diffusion]], social behavior, [[kinship]] patterns, law, politics, [[ideology]], religion, beliefs, patterns in production and consumption, exchange, socialization, gender, and other expressions of culture, with strong emphasis on the importance of [[fieldwork]], i.e living among the social group being studied for an extended period of time;
+
 
* [[linguistic anthropology]], which studies variation in [[language]] across time and space, the social uses of language, and the relationship between language and culture; and
+
[[Image:Table of Natural History, Cyclopaedia, Volume 2.jpg|thumb|right|200px|Table of natural history, 1728 ''Cyclopaedia'']] Institutionally, anthropology emerged from the development of [[natural history]] (expounded by authors such as [[Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon|Buffon]]) that occurred during the European colonization of the seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Programs of [[ethnography|ethnographic]] study have their origins in this era as the study of the "human primitives" overseen by colonial administrations. There was a tendency in late eighteenth-century Enlightenment thought to understand human society as natural phenomena that behaved in accordance with certain principles and that could be observed empirically.<ref>See, for instance, the writing of [[Auguste Comte]].</ref> In some ways, studying the [[language]], [[culture]], [[physiology]], and artifacts of European colonies was not unlike studying the [[flora]] and [[fauna]] of those places.
* [[archaeology]], which studies the material remains of human [[society|societies]]. Archaeology itself is normally treated as a separate (but related) field in the rest of the world, although closely related to the anthropological field of [[material culture]], which deals with physical objects created or used within a living or past group as mediums of understanding its cultural values.
+
 
 +
Drawing on the methods of the natural sciences and developing new techniques involving not only structured [[interview]]s, but unstructured "participant observation," and drawing on the new theory of [[evolution]] through natural selection, the branches of anthropology proposed the scientific study of a new object: humankind, conceived of as a whole. Crucial to this study is the concept of "culture," which anthropologists defined both as a universal capacity and a propensity for [[social learning]], [[thinking]], and acting (which they saw as a product of [[human evolution]] and something that distinguishes ''[[Homo sapiens]]''&mdash;and perhaps all species of genus ''[[Homo]]''&mdash;from other species), and as a particular adaptation to local conditions, which takes the form of highly variable [[belief]]s and practices. Thus, culture not only transcends the opposition between nature and nurture, but absorbs the peculiarly European distinction among [[politics]], [[religion]], [[kinship]], and the [[economics|economy]] as autonomous domains. Anthropology thus transcended the divisions between the natural sciences, [[social sciences]], and [[humanities]] to explore the biological, linguistic, material, and [[symbol]]ic dimensions of humankind in all forms.
  
More recently, some anthropology programs began dividing the field into two, one emphasizing the [[humanities]] and [[critical theory]], the other emphasizing the [[natural science]]s and [[empiricism|empirical observation]].
+
Anthropology grew increasingly distinct from natural history, and by the end of the nineteenth century, it had begun to crystallize into its modern form. By 1935, for example, it was possible for T. K. Penniman to write a history of the discipline entitled ''A Hundred Years of Anthropology.'' Early anthropology was dominated by proponents of unilinealism, who argued that all societies passed through a single evolutionary process, from the most primitive to the most advanced. Non-European societies were thus seen as evolutionary "living fossils," which could be studied in order to understand the European past. Scholars wrote histories of [[prehistory|prehistoric]] migrations that were sometimes valuable, but often also fanciful. It was during this time that Europeans, such as [[Paul Rivet]], first accurately traced [[Polynesia]]n migrations across the [[Pacific Ocean]]&mdash;though some of them believed those emigrations had originated in [[Egypt]]. Finally, concepts of [[race]] were developed with a view to better understand the nature of the biological variation within the human species, and tools such as [[anthropometry]] were devised as a means of measuring and categorizing this variation, not just within the genus ''Homo,'' but in [[fossil]] hominids and [[primate]]s as well. Unfortunately, racialist concepts were abused by a few and gave rise to theories of scientific [[racism]], which died out by the middle of the twentieth century, around the time that race was disqualified as a legitimate scientific category by anthropologists.
  
 +
==Academic Branches==
 +
Anthropology consists of two major divisions: [[Anthropology#Physical Anthropology|physical anthropology]], which deals with the human physical form from the past to the present, and [[Anthropology#Cultural Anthropology|cultural anthropology]], which studies human [[culture]] in all its aspects. Additionally, the areas of [[Anthropology#Archaeology|archaeology]], which studies the remains of historical societies, and [[Anthropology#Linguistic Anthropology|linguistic anthropology]], which studies variation in [[language]] across time and space and its relationship to culture, are considered sub-disciplines in [[North America]].
  
==Historical and institutional context==
+
===Physical Anthropology===
:''Main Article: [[History of anthropology ]]''
+
{{Main|Physical anthropology}}
The anthropologist [[Eric Wolf]] once characterized anthropology as the most scientific of the humanities, and the most humanistic of the social sciences.  Understanding how anthropology developed contributes to understanding how it fits into other academic disciplines.
 
  
Contemporary anthropologists claim a number of earlier thinkers as their forebearers and the discipline has several sources. However, anthropology can best be understood as an outgrowth of the [[Age of Enlightenment]]. It was during this period that Europeans attempted systematically to study human behavior. Traditions of [[jurisprudence]], [[history]], [[philology]] and [[sociology]] developed during this time and informed the development of the [[social sciences]] of which anthropology was a part. At the same time, the [[romanticism| romantic]] reaction to the Enlightenment produced thinkers such as [[Herder]] and later [[Wilhelm Dilthey]] whose work formed the basis for the culture concept which is central to the discipline.
+
[[Image:Line0179.jpg|thumb|right|225px| Skulls from Punuk Island, Bering Sea, Alaska]]
 +
Physical anthropology is the field that considers the [[biology]] and [[physiology]] of humanity, from [[primate]] ancestors to modern-day humans. Physical anthropology’s origins actually lie in the [[geology]] revolution, when the [[Earth]] was revealed to be much older than the previously accepted biblical scale, and [[fossil]]ized human remains and tools spurred the debate of "man's antiquity." Coupled with [[Charles Darwin]]'s explosive theory of [[evolution]], physical anthropology became the leading authority on the evidence of [[human evolution]].  
  
These intellectual movements in part grappled with one of the greatest paradoxes of [[modernity]]: as the world is becoming smaller and more integrated, people's experience of the world is increasingly atomized and dispersed. As [[Karl Marx]] and [[Friedrich Engels]] observed in the [[1840s]]:  
+
By the mid-twentieth century, a general [[geneology|geneological]] tree of human ancestors had been established, based upon fossils discovered by [[Donald C. Johanson]], [[Paul Abell]], and [[Mary Leakey|Mary]], [[Louis Leakey|Louis]], and [[Richard Leakey]] among others. While fossils found in [[Africa]], [[Asia]], and even [[South America]] challenged both the timeline and circumstances surrounding humanity's evolution, the basic paradigm is still accepted: millions of years ago, evolutionary adaptations in small [[mammal]]s, such as [[stereoscopic vision]], led to the development of the early primate line of descendants. Humans, [[gorilla]]s, and [[chimpanzee]]s were the last species to develop their own branches, from which the human line branched off into many different dead-end lines and closely related species, but the most direct line lead from the ''[[Australopithecus|Australopithecine]]'' species, then evolving into the ''[[Homo]]'' lines. ''[[Homo habilis]],'' ''[[Homo rudolfensis]],'' ''[[Homo erectus]],'' and ''[[Homo neanderthalensis]]'' were the first direct ancestors, with increased [[cranium|cranial capacity]]. <ref> Bernard G. Campbell, James D. Loy, and Kathryn Cruz-Uribe, ''Humankind Emerging'' (Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2005, ISBN 978-0205423804).</ref> It should be noted that the exact place of human ancestors in the evolutionary scheme is challenged nearly every year, and that new categories are emerging so that a conclusive paradigm has yet to be produced.
  
:All old-established national industries have been destroyed or are daily being destroyed.  They are dislodged by new industries, whose introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilized nations, by industries that no longer work up indigenous raw material but raw material drawn from the remotest zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of the globe. In place of the old wants, satisfied by the production of the country, we find new wants, requiring for their satisfaction the products of distant lands and climes. In place of the old local and national seclusion and self-sufficiency, we have intercourse in every direction, universal interdependence of nations.
+
Since the primary focus of physical anthropology is with human evolution, [[primatology]] is a closely linked sub-field of the discipline. Understanding human’s closest relatives, the [[primate]]s, helps understand the evolutionary process from [[ape]] to man. Primatologists, such as [[Jane Goodall]] and [[Dian Fossey]], have pioneered research observing primates in the wild, noting behavior that would have been common to human ancestors.  
  
Ironically, this universal interdependence, rather than leading to greater human solidarity, has coincided with increasing racial, ethnic, religious, and class divisions, and new &#8211; and to some confusing or disturbing &#8211; cultural expressions. These are the conditions of life with which people today must contend, but they have their origins in processes that began in the [[16th century]] and accelerated in the [[19th century]].
+
Not all physical anthropologists deal with the far past and hominid variants of the ''[[Homo sapiens]]'' line. Forensic anthropologists are used around the world to identify the remains of [[murder]] and disaster victims. One of the most famous forensic anthropologists, Clyde Snow, made his career identifying the remains of mass murders and [[genocide]]s in war-torn countries. <ref> William A. Haviland, Harald E. L. Prins, Dana Walrath, and Bunny McBride, ''Anthropology: The Human Challenge'' (Florence, KY: Wadsworth Publishing, 2010, ISBN 978-0495810841), 10. </ref>
  
Institutionally anthropology emerged from [[natural history]] (expounded by authors such as [[Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon|Buffon]]). This was the study of human beings - typically people living in European [[colonialism| colonies]]. Thus studying the language, culture, physiology, and artifacts of European colonies was more or less equivalent to studying the flora and fauna of those places. It was for this reason, for instance, that [[Lewis Henry Morgan]] could write monographs on both ''The League of the Iroquois'' and ''The American Beaver and His Works''. This is also why the material culture of 'civilized' nations such as China have historically been displayed in fine arts museums alongside European art while artifacts from Africa or Native North American cultures were displayed in Natural History Museums with dinosaur bones and nature dioramas. This being said, curatorial practice has changed dramatically in recent years, and it would be wrong to see anthropology as merely an extension of colonial rule and European [[chauvinism]], since its relationship to [[imperialism]] was and is complex.
+
Another emerging sub-discipline is population genetics, which tracks and studies contemporary groups of people and the physical/genetic differences between modern-day people, which similar studies had in the early and mid-twentieth century proved that notions of race were scientifically unsubstantial. One of the major discoveries in the field was how to track [[lineage]] through [[mitochondrial DNA]] and [[Y chromosome]]s, in effect, to tracking the origins of the modern humankind to human’s African genetic ancestors.
  
Anthropology grew increasingly distinct from natural history and by the end of the nineteenth century the discipline began to crystallize into its modern form - by 1935, for example, it was possible for T.K. Penniman to write a history of the discipline entitled ''A Hundred Years of Anthropology''. At the time, the field was dominated by 'the comparative method'. It was assumed that all societies passed through a single evolutionary process from the most primitive to most advanced. Non-European societies were thus seen as evolutionary 'living fossils' that could be studied in order to understand the European past. Scholars wrote histories of prehistoric migrations which were sometimes valuable but often also fanciful. It was during this time that Europeans first accurately traced [[polynesia|Polynesian]] migrations across the [[Pacific Ocean]] for instance - although some of them believed it originated in [[Egypt]]. Finally, the concept of [[race]] was actively discussed as a way to classify - and rank - human beings based on inherent biological difference.
+
Other sub-fields of the discipline include:
  
In the twentieth century academic disciplines began to organize around three main domains.  The "[[sciences]]" seeks to derive natural laws through reproducible and falsifiable experiments.    The "[[humanities]]" reflected an attempt to study different national traditions, in the form of [[history]] and the [[art]]s, as an attempt to provide people in emerging nation-states with a sense of coherence.  The "[[social sciences]]" emerged at this time as an attempt to develop scientific methods to address social phenomena, in an attempt to provide a universal basis for social knowledge.  Anthropology does not easily fit into one of these categories, and different branches of anthropology draw on one or more of these domains.
+
* [[Paleobotany]]
 +
* Paleopathology
 +
* [[Paleozoology]]
 +
* Medical anthropology
 +
* Paleoanthropology (also known as human [[paleontology]])
  
Drawing on the methods of the [[natural science]]s as well as developing new techniques involving not only structured interviews but unstructured "participant-observation" &#8211; and drawing on the new [[theory of evolution]] through [[natural selection]], they proposed the scientific study of a new object: "humankind," conceived of as a whole.  Crucial to this study is the concept "culture," which anthropologists defined both as a universal capacity and propensity for social learning, thinking, and acting (which they see as a product of human evolution and something that distinguishes Homo sapiens &#8211; and perhaps all species of genus ''[[Hominoid|Homo]]'' &#8211; from other species), and as a particular adaptation to local conditions that takes the form of highly variable beliefs and practices.  Thus, "culture" not only transcends the opposition between nature and nurture; it transcends and absorbs the peculiarly European distinction between politics, religion, kinship, and the economy as autonomous domains.  Anthropology thus transcends the divisions between the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities to explore the biological, linguistic, material, and symbolic dimensions of humankind in all forms.
+
===Cultural Anthropology===
 +
{{Main|Cultural anthropology}}
  
==Anthropology in the U.S.==
+
The primary focus of cultural anthropology, also referred to as social anthropology and ethnology, is the study of human [[culture]]. In regards to humanity, culture can deal with a host of subjects, such as [[religion]], [[mythology]], [[art]], [[music]], [[government]] systems, [[social structure]]s and hierarchies, [[family]] dynamics, [[tradition]]s, and [[custom]]s as well as cuisine, economy, and relationship to the environment. Any and all of these factors make up important aspects of culture and behavior, and are some of the pieces of human history that cultural anthropology tries to put to together into a larger, more comprehensive picture of the human experience.
Anthropology in the United States was pioneered by staff of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the Smithsonian Institution's Bureau of American Ethnology, such as John Wesley Powell and Frank Hamilton Cushing.  Academic Anthropology was established by [[Franz Boas]], who used his positions at [[Columbia University]] and the [[American Museum of Natural History]] to train and develop multiple generations of students. Boasian anthropology was politically active and suspicious of research dictated by the U.S. government or wealthy patrons. It was also rigorously empirical and skeptical of over-generalizations and attempts to establish universal laws. Boas studied immigrant children in order to demonstrate that biological race was not immutable and that human conduct and behavior was the result of nurture rather than nature.  
+
[[Image:Mvey0295.jpg|thumb|left|225px| ]]
  
Drawing on his German roots, he argued that the world was full of distinct 'cultures' rather than societies whose evolution could be measured by how much or how little 'civilization' they had. Boas felt that each culture has to be studied in its particularity, and argued that cross-cultural generalizations like those made in the [[natural science]]s were not possible. In doing so Boas fought discrimination against immigrants, African Americans, and Native North Americans. Many American anthropologists adopted Boas' agenda for social reform, and theories of race continue to be popular targets for anthropologists today.
+
With the rise of [[history]] and [[humanities]] studies, along with the natural sciences, during the nineteenth century, such scholars as [[Edward Burnett Tylor]] and [[James Frazer]] began to plant the seeds of cultural anthropology, wondering why people living in different parts of the world sometimes had similar [[belief]]s and practices. This question became the underlying concern of cultural anthropology. Grafton Elliot Smith argued that different groups must somehow have learned from one another, as if cultural traits were being spread from one place to another, or “diffused.” Others argued that different groups had the capability of inventing similar beliefs and practices independently. Some of those who advocated "independent invention," like Lewis Henry Morgan, additionally supposed that similarities meant that different groups had passed through the same stages of cultural evolution.
  
Boas's first generation of students included [[Alfred Kroeber]], [[Robert Lowie]], and [[Edward Sapir]]. All of these scholars produced richly detailed studies which were first to describe Native North America. In doing so they provided a wealth of details used to attack the theory of a single evolutionary process. Their focus on Native American languages also helped establish [[linguistics]] as a truly general science and free it from its historical focus on [[Indo-European languages]].
+
[[Ethnography]], the backbone of cultural anthropology methodology, was developed by [[Bronislaw Malinowski]] in his work in the Trobriand Islands of [[Melanesia]] between 1915 and 1918. Although nineteenth-century ethnologists saw "diffusion" and "independent invention" as mutually exclusive and competing theories, most ethnographers quickly reached a consensus that both processes occur, and that both can plausibly account for cross-cultural similarities.
  
The publication of [[Alfred Kroeber]]'s textbook ''Anthropology'' marked a turning point in American anthropology. After three decades of amassing material the urge to generalize grew. This was most obvious in the 'Culture and Personality' studies carried out by younger Boasians such as [[Margaret Mead]] and [[Ruth Benedict]]. Influenced by psychoanalytic psychologists such as [[Sigmund Freud]] and [[Carl Jung]], these authors sought to understand that way that individual personalities were shaped by the wider cultural and social forces in which they grew up. While Culture and Personality works such as ''Coming of Age in Samoa'' and ''The Chrysanthemum and the Sword'' remain popular with the American public, Mead and Benedict never had the impact on the discipline of anthropology that some expected. While Boas had planned that Ruth Benedict succeed him as chair of Columbia's anthropology department, she was sidelined by [[Ralph Linton]], and Mead was limited to her offices at the [[American Museum of Natural History| ANHM]].
+
In the 1950s and mid-1960s, anthropology tended increasingly to model itself after the [[natural science]]s. Some anthropologists, such as Lloyd Fallers and [[Clifford Geertz]], focused on processes of modernization by which newly independent states could develop. Others, such as [[Julian Steward]] and [[Leslie White]], focused on how societies evolve and fit their ecological niche&mdash;an approach popularized by [[Marvin Harris]]. Economic anthropology through the influence of [[Karl Polanyi]] focused on how traditional [[economics]] ignored cultural and social factors. In [[England]], British social anthropology's paradigm began to fragment as [[Max Gluckman]] and Peter Worsley experimented with [[Marxism]] and others incorporated [[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss]]'s [[structuralism]] into their work.
  
==Anthropology in Britain==
+
Structuralism also influenced a number of developments in the 1960s and 1970s, including cognitive anthropology and componential analysis. Authors such as David Schneider, [[Clifford Geertz]], and Marshall Sahlins developed a more fleshed-out concept of culture as a web of meaning or signification, which proved very popular within and beyond the discipline. In keeping with the times, much of anthropology became politicized through the [[Algerian War of Independence]] and opposition to the [[Vietnam War]]. By the 1970s, the authors of volumes such as ''Reinventing Anthropology'' worried about anthropology's relevance.
Whereas Boas picked his opponents to pieces through attention to detail, in Britain modern anthropology was formed by rejecting historical reconstruction in the name of a science of society that focused on analyzing how societies held together in the present.
 
  
The two most important names in this tradition were [[Alfred Reginald Radcliffe-Brown]] and [[Bronislaw Malinowski]], both of whom released seminal works in 1922. Radcliffe-Brown's initial fieldwork in the [[Andaman Islands]] was carried out in the old style, but after reading [[Émile Durkheim]] he published an account of his research (entitled simply ''The Andaman Islanders'') which drew heavily on the French sociologist. Over time he developed an approach known as structure-functionalism, which focused on how institutions in societies worked to balance out or create an equilibrium in the social system to keep it functioning harmoniously. [[Bronislaw Malinowski| Malinowski]], on the other hand, advocated an unhyphenated 'functionalism' which examined how society functioned to meet individual needs. Malinowski is best known not for his theory, however, but for his detailed ethnography and advances in methodology. His classic ''Argonauts of the Western Pacific'' advocated getting 'the native's point of view' and an approach to field work that became standard in the field.
+
In the 1980s issues of power, such as those examined in [[Eric Wolf]]'s ''Europe and the People without History,'' were central to the discipline. Books like ''Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter'' pondered anthropology's ties to colonial inequality, while the immense popularity of theorists such as [[Michel Foucault]] moved issues of power and hegemony into the spotlight. [[Gender]] and [[human sexuality]] became popular topics, as did the relationship between history and anthropology, and the relationship between [[social structure]] and individual agency.
  
Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown's success stem from the fact that they, like Boas, actively trained students and aggressively built up institutions which furthered their programmatic ambitions. This was particularly the case with Radcliffe-Brown, who spread his agenda for 'Social Anthropology' by teaching at universities across the [[Commonwealth of Nations|Commonwealth]]. From the late 1930s until the post-war period a string of monographs and edited volumes appeared which cemented the paradigm of British Social Anthropology. Famous ethnographies include ''The Nuer'' by [[Edward Evan Evans-Pritchard]] and ''The Dynamics of Clanship Among the Tallensi'' by [[Meyer Fortes]], while well known edited volumes include ''African Systems of Kinship and Marriage'' and ''African Political Systems''.
+
In the late 1980s and 1990s, authors such as [[George Marcus]] and [[James Clifford]] pondered ethnographic authority, particularly how and why anthropological knowledge was possible and authoritative. Ethnographies became more reflexive, explicitly addressing the author's methodology and cultural positioning, and their influence on his or her ethnographic analysis. This was part of a more general trend of [[postmodernism]] that was popular contemporaneously. Currently, anthropologists have begun to pay attention to [[globalization]], [[medicine]] and [[biotechnology]], indigenous rights, and the anthropology of industrialized societies.
  
==Anthropology in France==
+
Sub-fields include:
Anthropology in France has a less clear genealogy than the British and American traditions. Most commentators consider [[Marcel Mauss]] to be the founder of the French anthropological tradition. Mauss was a member of [[Émile Durkheim| Durkheim's]] [[Annee Sociologique]] group, and while Durkheim and other examined the state of modern societies, Mauss and his collaborators (such as [[Henri Hubert]] and [[Robert Hertz]]) drew on ethnography and philology to analyze societies which were not as 'differentiated' as European nation states. In particular, Mauss's ''Essay on the Gift'' was to prove of enduring relevance in anthropological studies of [[trade|exchange]] and [[reciprocity (cultural anthropology)|reciprocity]].
+
* [[Anthropology of art]]
 +
* [[Anthropology of religion]]
 +
* [[Applied anthropology]]
 +
* [[Cross-cultural studies]]
 +
* [[Cyber anthropology]]
 +
* [[Economic anthropology]]
 +
* [[Ecological anthropology]]
 +
* [[Ethnobotany]]
 +
* [[Ethnography]]
 +
* [[Ethnomusicology]]
 +
* [[Ethnozoology]]
 +
* [[Psychological anthropology]] (also known as culture-and-personality studies)
 +
* [[Political anthropology]]
 +
* [[Urban anthropology]]
 +
* [[Visual anthropology]]
  
Throughout the interwar years, French interest in anthropology often dovetailed with wider cultural movements such as [[surrealism]] and [[primitivism (art movement)| primitivism]] which drew on ethnography for inspiration. [[Marcel Griaule]] and [[Michel Leiris]] are examples of people who combined anthropology with the French avant-garde. During this time most of what is known as ''ethnologie'' was restricted to museums, and anthropology had a close relationship with studies of [[folklore]].
+
===Archaeology===
 +
{{Main|Archaeology}}
  
Above all, however, it was [[Claude Lévi-Strauss]] who helped institutionalize anthropology in France. In addition to the enormous influence his [[structuralism]] exerted across multiple disciplines, Lévi-Strauss established ties with American and British anthropologists. At the same time he established centers and laboratories within France to provide an institutional context within anthropology while training influential students such as [[Maurice Godelier]] and [[Francoise Heritier]] who would prove influential in the world of French anthropology. Much of the distinct character of France's anthropology today is a result of the fact that most anthropology is carried out in nationally-funded research laboratories rather than academic departments in universities.
+
[[Image:Monte Albán archeological site, Oaxaca.jpg|thumb|300px|Monte Albán archeological site]]
  
==Anthropology after World War Two==
+
Archaeology studies human [[culture]]s through the recovery, documentation, and analysis of material remains and environmental data, including [[architecture]], artifacts, biofacts, human remains, and landscapes. While there are numerous goals pertaining to its various sub-disciplines, the main goal of archaeology is to create the most thorough understanding of how and why both historical and prehistoric people lived, to understand the evolution of human society and [[civilization]]s, and to use knowledge of human ancestors’ history to discover insights into modern-day societies. Through such efforts, it is hoped that archaeology will support increased understanding among the various peoples of the world, and thus aid in the growth of peace and harmony among all humankind.
Before [[WWII]] British 'social anthropology' and American 'cultural anthropology' were still distinct traditions. It was after the war that the two would blend to create a 'sociocultural' anthropology.
 
  
In the 1950s and mid 1960s anthropology tended increasingly to model itself after the [[natural science]]s. Some such as [[Llyd Fallers]] and [[Clifford Geertz]] focused on processes on modernization by which newly independent states could develop. Others, such as [[Julian Steward]] and [[Leslie White]] focused on how societies evolve and fit their ecological niche - an approach popularized by [[Marvin Harris]]. [[Economic anthropology]] as influenced by [[Karl Polanyi]] and practiced by [[Marshall Sahlins]] and [[Greg Dalton]] focused on how traditional [[economics]] ignored cultural and social factors. In England, British Social Anthropology's paradigm began to fragment as [[Max Gluckman]] and [[Peter Worsley]] experimented with Marxism and authors such as [[Rodney Needham]] and [[Edmund Leach]] incorporated Lévi-Strauss's structuralism into their work.
+
Archaeology as a serious academic discipline did not emerge until the end of the nineteenth century, the byproduct of a number of scientific discoveries and new theories. The discovery that the [[Earth]] was older than previously understood, and therefore that humankind had been around longer than the established timeframe of the [[Bible]], spurred scientific curiosity in exploring human origins. Similarly, [[Charles Darwin]]’s ''On the Origin of the Species'' (1859) introduced the theory of [[evolution]], inciting a furor of academic debate and research. Even more important for archaeology was [[Christian Jürgensen Thomsen|C. J. Thomsen’s]] establishment of the "Three Age System," in which man’s history was categorized into three eras based on [[technology|technological]] advancement: the [[Stone Age]], [[Bronze Age]], and [[Iron Age]]. The chronological history of humankind became an exciting academic field. Soon, teams of archaeologists were working around the world, discovering long-lost ruins and cities. <ref> Paul Bahn and Colin Renfrew, ''Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice'' (New York, NY: Thames and Hudson, 2008, ISBN 978-0500287132), 25–34. </ref>
  
Structuralism also influenced a number of development in 1960s and 1970s, including [[cognitive anthropology]] and componential analysis. Authors such as [[David Schneider]], [[Clifford Geertz]], and [[Marshall Sahlins]] developed a more fleshed out concept of culture as a web of meaning or signification which proved very popular. In keeping with the times, much of anthropology became politicized through its opposition to the [[Vietnam War]] and the [[Algerian War of Independence]] and the authors of volumes such as ''Reinventing Anthropology'' worried about its relevance and [[Marxism]] became more and more popular in the discipline.
+
Archaeology took form in the 1960s, when a number of academics, most notably Lewis Binford, proposed a "new archaeology," which would be more "scientific" and "anthropological." It began using [[hypothesis]] testing and [[scientific method]]s, such as the newly established [[dating]] tests, as well as focusing upon the social aspects of the findings. Archaeology became less focused on categorizing, and more on understanding how the evolution of civilization came about, later being dubbed “processual archaeology.
  
In the 1980s issues of power, such as those examined in [[Eric Wolf]]'s ''Europe and the People Without History'' - were central to the discipline. Books like ''Anthropology and the Colonial Equality'' pondered anthropology's ties to colonial inequality, while the immense popularity of authors such as [[Antonio Gramsci]] and [[Michel Foucault]] moved issues of power and hegemony into the spotlight. Gender and sexuality became a popular topic, as did the relationship between history and anthropology, influenced by [[Marshall Sahlins]] (again) who drew on [[Claude Lévi-Strauss|Lévi-Strauss]] and [[Fernand Braudel]] to examine the relationship between cultural structure and individual agency.  
+
In the 1980s, a new movement arose, led by the British archaeologists Michael Shanks, Christopher Tilley, Daniel Miller, and Ian Hodder, questioning processualism's appeals to science and impartiality, and emphasizing the importance of relativism, becoming known as post-processual archaeology. Further adaptation and innovation in archaeology has continued.
  
In the late 1980s and 1990s authors such as [[George Marcus]] and [[James Clifford]] pondered ethnographic authority and how and why anthropological knowledge was possible and authoritative. This was part of a more general trend of [[postmodernism]] that was popular. Currently anthropology focuses on globalization, medicine and biotechnology, indigenous rights, and the anthropology of Europe.
+
Contemporary sub-fields of archaeology include:
 +
* Ariel Archaeology
 +
* Archaeoastronomy
 +
* Archaeological Science
 +
* Archaeobotany
 +
* Archaeozoology
 +
* Computational Archaeology
 +
* Ethnoarchaeology
 +
* Experimental Archaeology
 +
* Landscape Archaeology
 +
* Maritime Archaeology
 +
* Museum Studies
 +
* Paleopathology
 +
* Taphonomy
  
==Politics of anthropology==
+
===Linguistic Anthropology===
Anthropology's traditional involvement with nonwestern cultures has involved it in politics in many different ways.
+
{{Main|Linguistic anthropology}}
  
Some political problems arise simply because anthropologists usually have more power than the people they study. Some have argued that the discipline is a form of colonialist theft in which the anthropologist gains power at the expense of subjects. The anthropologist, they argue, can gain yet more power by exploiting knowledge and artifacts of the people she or he studies while the people she or he studies gain nothing, or even lose, in exchange. An example of this exploitative relationship can been seen in the collaboration in Africa prior to World War II of British anthropologists and colonial forces. More recently, there have been newfound concerns about bioprospecting, along with struggles for self-representation for native peoples and the repatriation of indigenous remains and material culture.
+
Linguistic anthropology is rooted largely in general [[linguistics|linguistic]] studies which deals with the components of [[language]], mainly [[phonetics]], [[morphology]], and even the [[kinesics]] of language. Linguistic anthropology grew out of [[cultural anthropology]], when anthropologists realized what information the study of language can bring.  
  
Other political controversies come from American anthropology's emphasis on cultural relativism and its long-standing antipathy to the concept of race. As mentioned above, Boas was a well-known social reformer whose activism and anthropological teaching went hand in hand. The development of [[sociobiology]] in the late 1960s was opposed by cultural anthropologists such as [[Marshall Sahlins]], who argued that these positions were reductive.  While authors such John Randal Baker continued to develop the biological concept of race into the 1970s, the rise of genetics has proven to be central to developments on this front. As genetics continues to advance as a science, biological anthropologists such as [[Jonathan Marks]] have continued to refine their opposition to folk notions of race while addressing recent developments in biology.
+
The first main branch of the discipline is [[historical linguistics]], which studies the evolution of language. All languages have a genealogical tree structure that shows their evolution. For instance, modern [[English language|English]] comes from a combination of [[French language|French]], [[Latin language|Latin]], and [[German language|Germanic]] sources, which can all traces their roots back to a common origin, the [[Indo-European language]] from the [[steppe]]s of [[Russia]]. The ability of anthropological linguists to trace a language's origins based on the morphological and phonetic changes also can be used to track [[human migration]] patterns. Lexicostatistical dating is the technique used for migration tracing, and one of the most famous examples is the pattern of [[Native American]] settlement thousands of years ago on such a linguistic approach.
  
Finally, anthropology has a history of entanglement with government intelligence agencies and anti-war politics. Boas publicly objected to US participation [[World War I]] and the collaboration of some anthropologists with US intelligence. In contrast, many of Boas' anthropologist contemporaries were active in the war effort in some form, including dozens who served in the [[Office of Strategic Services]] and the Office of War Information. In the 1950s, the [[American Anthropological Association]] provided the [[CIA]] information on the area specialities of its members, and a number of anthropologists participated in the U.S. government's [[Operation Camelot]] during the war in Vietnam. At the same time, many other anthropologists were active in the antiwar movement and passed resolutions in the [[American Anthropological Association]] (AAA) condemning anthropological involvement in covert operations. Anthropologists were also vocal in their opposition to the war in Iraq although their was no consensus amongst all practitioners of the discipline.
+
The second major linguistic study in anthropology is called [[ethnolinguistics]]. There are two historically different approaches in the discipline, the first being the "Sapir-Whorf hypothesis," proposed in the mid-twentieth century by [[Edward Sapir]] and [[Benjamin Whorf]]. They argued that "Each language provides particular grooves of linguistic expression that predispose speakers of that language to perceive the world in a certain way. ... The picture of the universe shifts from tongue to tongue."<ref> Haviland et. al., 381. </ref> The other approach generally accepts that [[culture]] and language predispose people to particular perspectives, but regards language as a continually evolving phenomena that is constantly consuming different influences and changing the society's perspective. Both perspectives agree that language, as one of humankind's most distinguishing features, is a valuable source of information about culture and [[psychology]], capable of revealing the abstract and cognitive aspects of our minds.
  
Professional anthropological bodies often object to the use of anthropology for the benefit of the [[state]]. Their codes of ethics or statements may proscribe anthropologists from giving secret briefings. The British Association for Social Anthropology has called these scholarships ethically dangerous and divise For example, the British Association for Social Anthropology has condemned the [[CIA]]'s [[Pat Roberts Intelligence Scholars Program]], which anonymously funds anthropology students at US universities in preparation for those students to spy for the [[United States]] government. The AAA's current 'Statement of Professional Responsibility' clearly states that "in relation with their own government and with host governments... no secret research, no secret reports or debriefings of any kind should be agreed to or given."
+
==Politics of anthropology==
 +
Anthropology, as the study of humankind in all its dimensions, has necessarily been involved in social issues. Anténor Firmin wrote ''De l'égalité des races humaines'' (1885) as a direct rebuttal to [[Count de Gobineau]]’s polemical four-volume work ''Essai sur l'inegalite des Races Humaines'' (1853–1855), which asserted the superiority of the Aryan race and the inferiority of blacks and other people of color. Firmin’s work argued the opposite, that "all men are endowed with the same qualities and the same faults, without distinction of color or anatomical form. The races are equal" (450). Firmin grew up in [[Haiti]], and was admitted to the Societé d’ Anthropologie de Paris in 1884, while serving as a diplomat. His persuasive critique and rigorous analysis of many of that society’s leading scholars made him an early pioneer in the so-called vindicationist struggle in anthropology. Many scholars also associate his work with the very first ideas of Pan-Africanism.
  
==Anthropological concepts==
+
[[United States|American]] [[cultural anthropology]] developed during the first four decades of the twentieth century under the powerful influence of [[Franz Boas]] and his students, and their struggle against racial determinism and the [[ethnocentrism]] of nineteenth-century cultural evolutionism. With the additional impact of the [[Great Depression]] and [[World War II]], American anthropology developed a pronounced liberal-left tone by the 1950s. The "politics of anthropology" has become a pervasive concern since that time. Whatever the realities, the notion of anthropology as somehow complicit in morally unacceptable projects has become a significant topic for debate.
*[[Behavioral modernity]]
 
*[[Colonialism]]
 
*[[Culture]]
 
*[[Ethnicity]]
 
*[[Exchange]] and [[Reciprocity]]
 
*[[Family]]
 
*[[Gender role]]
 
*[[Kinship and descent]]
 
*[[Marriage]]
 
*[[Model culture]]
 
*[[Political system]]s
 
*[[Race]]
 
*[[Religion]]
 
*[[Subsistence]]
 
*[[Transculturation]]
 
  
==Anthropological fields and subfields==
+
Explicitly political concerns have to do with anthropologists’ entanglements with government intelligence agencies, on the one hand, and anti-war politics on the other. Franz Boas publicly objected to U.S. participation in [[World War I]], and after the war he published a brief exposé and condemnation of the participation of several American archaeologists in [[espionage]] in [[Mexico]] under their cover as scientists. But by the 1940s, many of Boas' anthropologist contemporaries were active in the allied war effort against the [[Axis Powers|"Axis"]] ([[Nazism|Nazi]] [[Germany]], [[Fascism|Fascist]] [[Italy]], and Imperial [[Japan]]). Many served in the armed forces, but others worked in intelligence (for example, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and the Office of War Information). David H. Price's work on American anthropology during the [[Cold War]] provides detailed accounts of the pursuit and dismissal of several anthropologists for their vocal left-wing sympathies. Many anthropologists (students and teachers) were active in the antiwar movement during the [[Vietnam War]] years, and a great many resolutions condemning the war in all its aspects were passed overwhelmingly at the annual meetings of the American Anthropological Association. In the decades since the Vietnam war, the tone of cultural and social anthropology, at least, has been increasingly politicized, reflecting [[Marxism|Marxist]], [[feminism|feminist]], [[post-colonialism|post-colonial]], [[postmodernism|postmodern]], and [[Michel Foucault|Foucault]]ian perspectives.
*[[Biological anthropology]] (also [[Physical anthropology]])
 
**[[Forensic anthropology]]
 
**[[Paleoethnobotany]]
 
*[[Cultural anthropology]] (also [[Social anthropology]])
 
**[[Applied anthropology]]
 
**[[Cross-Cultural Studies]]  
 
**[[Cyber anthropology]]
 
**[[Development anthropology]]
 
**[[Environmental anthropology]]
 
**[[Economic anthropology]]
 
**[[Ecological anthropology]]
 
**[[Ethnography]]
 
**[[Ethnomusicology]]
 
**[[Gender]]
 
**[[Medical anthropology]]
 
**[[Psychological anthropology]]
 
**[[Political anthropology]]
 
**[[Anthropology of religion]]
 
**[[Public anthropology]]
 
**[[Urban anthropology]]
 
**[[Visual anthropology]]
 
  
*[[Anthropological linguistics|Linguistic anthropology]]
+
==Notes==
**[[Descriptive linguistics|Synchronic linguistics]] (or Descriptive linguistics)
+
<references/>
**[[Diachronic linguistics]] (or [[Historical linguistics]])
 
**[[Ethnolinguistics]]
 
**[[Sociolinguistics]]
 
  
*[[Archaeology]]
+
==References==
 +
* Asad, Talal. ''Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter.'' Ithaca, NY: Ithaca Press, 1973. ISBN 0903729016
 +
* Bahn, Paul, and Colin Renfrew, ''Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice''. New York, NY: Thames and Hudson, 2008. ISBN 978-0500287132
 +
* Campbell, Bernard G., James D. Loy, and Kathryn Cruz-Uribe. ''Humankind Emerging''. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2005. ISBN 978-0205423804
 +
* Darnell, Regna. ''Invisible Genealogies: A History of Americanist Anthropology.'' Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2001. ISBN 0803266294
 +
* Desai, Gaurav. ''Subject to Colonialism: African Self-Fashioning and the Colonial Library.'' Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2001. ISBN 0822326353
 +
* Haviland, William A., Harald E. L. Prins, Dana Walrath, and Bunny McBride, ''Anthropology: The Human Challenge''. Florence, KY: Wadsworth Publishing, 2010. ISBN 978-0495810841
 +
* Lewis, Herbert S. "The Misrepresentation of Anthropology and its Consequences." ''American Anthropologist'' 100 (1998).
 +
* Lewis, Herbert S. "Imagining Anthropology's History." ''Reviews in Anthropology'' 33 (2004).
 +
* Lewis, Herbert S. "Anthropology, the Cold War, and Intellectual History.” In ''Histories of Anthropology Annual, Vol. I'', edited by Regna Darnell and Frederick W. Gleach. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2005. ISBN 978-0803266575
 +
* Pels, Peter, and Oscar Salemink. ''Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology.'' Ann Arbor: MI: University of Michigan Press, 2000. ISBN 0472087460
 +
* Price, David. ''Threatening Anthropology: McCarthyism and the FBI's Surveillance of Activist Anthropologists.'' Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2004. ISBN 0822333260
 +
* Rabinow, Paul. ''Reflections on Fieldwork in Morocco.'' Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1977. ISBN 0520035291
 +
* Trencher, Susan. ''Mirrored Images: American Anthropology and American Culture, 1960–1980.'' Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2000. ISBN 0897896734
  
 
==External links==
 
==External links==
*[http://www.aaanet.org/ The American Anthropological Association Homepage] - the webpage of the largest professional organization of anthropologists in the world.
+
All links retrieved October 4, 2012.
*[http://www.worldcatlibraries.org/wcpa/ow/09dbb3346fc1c2a4.html Race] - a book by John Randal Baker discussing the origins of racial classification and oppositions to the concept.
+
* [http://www.aaanet.org/ The American Anthropological Association Homepage] - The webpage of the largest professional organization of anthropologists in the world.
*[http://www.antropologi.info Anthropology.Info]
+
* [http://www.physanth.org/ American Association of Physical Anthropologists]
*[http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20001120&c=2&s=price Anthropologists as Spies] - an article by David Price examining the relationship between American Anthropology and US intelligence services.
+
* [http://www.anthropology.net Anthropology.net] - A community-orientated anthropology web portal with user run blogs, forums, tags, and a wiki.
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/4603271.stm Pat Roberts Intelligence Program] - a BBC article on the program
+
* [http://anthro.amnh.org/anthro.html Division of Anthropology, American Museum of Natural History] – Over 160,000 objects from Pacific, North American, African, and Asian ethnographic collections with images and detailed descriptions, linked to the original catalogue pages, field notebooks, and photographs available online.
*[http://www.antropologi.info/blog/anthropology Social and Cultural Anthropology in the News] - (nearly) daily updated blog
+
* [http://hpsfaa.wildapricot.org/ High Plains Society for Applied Anthropology]
*[http://www.anthrobase.com Anthrobase.com] - Collection of anthropological texts
+
* [http://www.nmnh.si.edu/naa/ National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution] – Collects and preserves historical and contemporary anthropological materials that document the world's cultures and the history of anthropology.
*[http://www.cybercultura.it Cybercultura]  - Collection of web resources about anthropology of cyberspace
+
* [http://www.practicinganthropology.org/ National Association for the Practice of Anthropology]
 +
* [http://www.therai.org.uk/ The Royal Anthropological Institute Homepage] – The Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland (RAI) is the world's longest-established scholarly association dedicated to the furtherance of anthropology. They also have a large ethnographic film and video collection.
 +
* [http://www.savageminds.org/ Savage Minds] – Notes and Queries in Anthropology — A Group Blog
 +
* [http://www.antropologi.info/blog/anthropology Social and Cultural Anthropology in the News] – Daily-updated blog
 +
* [http://www.bestonlinecollege.org/anthropology/ Best Online Resources for Anthropology Students]  
 +
* [http://www.bestfreeonline.net/resources/free-anthropology-resources/ Free Anthropology Resources]
  
 
{{Social sciences-footer}}
 
{{Social sciences-footer}}
  
 
+
{{Credit1|Anthropology|74229351|}}
{{Credit|22905056}}
 
 
 
==Comments==
 
This is an unfinished work in progress—[[User:Jennifer Tanabe|Jennifer Tanabe]] 18:32, 16 Sep 2005 (CDT)
 

Revision as of 20:34, 23 January 2013


Initiation rite of the Yao people of Malawi

Anthropology (from the Greek word ἄνθρωπος, "human" or "person") consists of the study of humanity (see genus Homo). The discipline is a holistic study, concerned with all humans, at all times, in all humanity's dimensions. Anthropology is traditionally distinguished from other disciplines by its emphasis on cultural relativity, in-depth examination of context, and cross-cultural comparisons.

Anthropology is methodologically diverse, using both qualitative and quantitative methods, such as firsthand case studies of living cultures, careful excavations of material remains, and interpretations of both living and extinct linguistic practices. In North America and other Western cultures, anthropology is traditionally broken down into four main divisions: physical anthropology, archaeology, cultural anthropology (also known as social anthropology), and linguistic anthropology. Each sub-discipline uses different techniques, taking different approaches to study human beings at all points in time. Through bringing together the results of all these endeavors humans can hope to better understand themselves, and learn to live in harmony, fulfilling their potential as individuals and societies, taking care of each other and the earth that is their home.

Historical and institutional context

Did you know?
The anthropologist Eric Wolf once described anthropology as "the most scientific of the humanities, and the most humanistic of the sciences."

The anthropologist Eric Wolf once described anthropology as "the most scientific of the humanities, and the most humanistic of the sciences." Anthropology can best be understood as an outgrowth of the Age of Enlightenment, a period when Europeans attempted to study human behavior systematically. The traditions of jurisprudence, history, philology, and sociology then evolved into something more closely resembling the modern views of these disciplines and informed the development of the social sciences, of which anthropology was a part. At the same time, the romantic reaction to the Enlightenment produced thinkers, such as Johann Gottfried Herder and later Wilhelm Dilthey, whose work formed the basis for the "culture concept," which is central to the discipline.

Table of natural history, 1728 Cyclopaedia

Institutionally, anthropology emerged from the development of natural history (expounded by authors such as Buffon) that occurred during the European colonization of the seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Programs of ethnographic study have their origins in this era as the study of the "human primitives" overseen by colonial administrations. There was a tendency in late eighteenth-century Enlightenment thought to understand human society as natural phenomena that behaved in accordance with certain principles and that could be observed empirically.[1] In some ways, studying the language, culture, physiology, and artifacts of European colonies was not unlike studying the flora and fauna of those places.

Drawing on the methods of the natural sciences and developing new techniques involving not only structured interviews, but unstructured "participant observation," and drawing on the new theory of evolution through natural selection, the branches of anthropology proposed the scientific study of a new object: humankind, conceived of as a whole. Crucial to this study is the concept of "culture," which anthropologists defined both as a universal capacity and a propensity for social learning, thinking, and acting (which they saw as a product of human evolution and something that distinguishes Homo sapiens—and perhaps all species of genus Homo—from other species), and as a particular adaptation to local conditions, which takes the form of highly variable beliefs and practices. Thus, culture not only transcends the opposition between nature and nurture, but absorbs the peculiarly European distinction among politics, religion, kinship, and the economy as autonomous domains. Anthropology thus transcended the divisions between the natural sciences, social sciences, and humanities to explore the biological, linguistic, material, and symbolic dimensions of humankind in all forms.

Anthropology grew increasingly distinct from natural history, and by the end of the nineteenth century, it had begun to crystallize into its modern form. By 1935, for example, it was possible for T. K. Penniman to write a history of the discipline entitled A Hundred Years of Anthropology. Early anthropology was dominated by proponents of unilinealism, who argued that all societies passed through a single evolutionary process, from the most primitive to the most advanced. Non-European societies were thus seen as evolutionary "living fossils," which could be studied in order to understand the European past. Scholars wrote histories of prehistoric migrations that were sometimes valuable, but often also fanciful. It was during this time that Europeans, such as Paul Rivet, first accurately traced Polynesian migrations across the Pacific Ocean—though some of them believed those emigrations had originated in Egypt. Finally, concepts of race were developed with a view to better understand the nature of the biological variation within the human species, and tools such as anthropometry were devised as a means of measuring and categorizing this variation, not just within the genus Homo, but in fossil hominids and primates as well. Unfortunately, racialist concepts were abused by a few and gave rise to theories of scientific racism, which died out by the middle of the twentieth century, around the time that race was disqualified as a legitimate scientific category by anthropologists.

Academic Branches

Anthropology consists of two major divisions: physical anthropology, which deals with the human physical form from the past to the present, and cultural anthropology, which studies human culture in all its aspects. Additionally, the areas of archaeology, which studies the remains of historical societies, and linguistic anthropology, which studies variation in language across time and space and its relationship to culture, are considered sub-disciplines in North America.

Physical Anthropology

Skulls from Punuk Island, Bering Sea, Alaska

Physical anthropology is the field that considers the biology and physiology of humanity, from primate ancestors to modern-day humans. Physical anthropology’s origins actually lie in the geology revolution, when the Earth was revealed to be much older than the previously accepted biblical scale, and fossilized human remains and tools spurred the debate of "man's antiquity." Coupled with Charles Darwin's explosive theory of evolution, physical anthropology became the leading authority on the evidence of human evolution.

By the mid-twentieth century, a general geneological tree of human ancestors had been established, based upon fossils discovered by Donald C. Johanson, Paul Abell, and Mary, Louis, and Richard Leakey among others. While fossils found in Africa, Asia, and even South America challenged both the timeline and circumstances surrounding humanity's evolution, the basic paradigm is still accepted: millions of years ago, evolutionary adaptations in small mammals, such as stereoscopic vision, led to the development of the early primate line of descendants. Humans, gorillas, and chimpanzees were the last species to develop their own branches, from which the human line branched off into many different dead-end lines and closely related species, but the most direct line lead from the Australopithecine species, then evolving into the Homo lines. Homo habilis, Homo rudolfensis, Homo erectus, and Homo neanderthalensis were the first direct ancestors, with increased cranial capacity. [2] It should be noted that the exact place of human ancestors in the evolutionary scheme is challenged nearly every year, and that new categories are emerging so that a conclusive paradigm has yet to be produced.

Since the primary focus of physical anthropology is with human evolution, primatology is a closely linked sub-field of the discipline. Understanding human’s closest relatives, the primates, helps understand the evolutionary process from ape to man. Primatologists, such as Jane Goodall and Dian Fossey, have pioneered research observing primates in the wild, noting behavior that would have been common to human ancestors.

Not all physical anthropologists deal with the far past and hominid variants of the Homo sapiens line. Forensic anthropologists are used around the world to identify the remains of murder and disaster victims. One of the most famous forensic anthropologists, Clyde Snow, made his career identifying the remains of mass murders and genocides in war-torn countries. [3]

Another emerging sub-discipline is population genetics, which tracks and studies contemporary groups of people and the physical/genetic differences between modern-day people, which similar studies had in the early and mid-twentieth century proved that notions of race were scientifically unsubstantial. One of the major discoveries in the field was how to track lineage through mitochondrial DNA and Y chromosomes, in effect, to tracking the origins of the modern humankind to human’s African genetic ancestors.

Other sub-fields of the discipline include:

Cultural Anthropology

Main article: Cultural anthropology

The primary focus of cultural anthropology, also referred to as social anthropology and ethnology, is the study of human culture. In regards to humanity, culture can deal with a host of subjects, such as religion, mythology, art, music, government systems, social structures and hierarchies, family dynamics, traditions, and customs as well as cuisine, economy, and relationship to the environment. Any and all of these factors make up important aspects of culture and behavior, and are some of the pieces of human history that cultural anthropology tries to put to together into a larger, more comprehensive picture of the human experience.

With the rise of history and humanities studies, along with the natural sciences, during the nineteenth century, such scholars as Edward Burnett Tylor and James Frazer began to plant the seeds of cultural anthropology, wondering why people living in different parts of the world sometimes had similar beliefs and practices. This question became the underlying concern of cultural anthropology. Grafton Elliot Smith argued that different groups must somehow have learned from one another, as if cultural traits were being spread from one place to another, or “diffused.” Others argued that different groups had the capability of inventing similar beliefs and practices independently. Some of those who advocated "independent invention," like Lewis Henry Morgan, additionally supposed that similarities meant that different groups had passed through the same stages of cultural evolution.

Ethnography, the backbone of cultural anthropology methodology, was developed by Bronislaw Malinowski in his work in the Trobriand Islands of Melanesia between 1915 and 1918. Although nineteenth-century ethnologists saw "diffusion" and "independent invention" as mutually exclusive and competing theories, most ethnographers quickly reached a consensus that both processes occur, and that both can plausibly account for cross-cultural similarities.

In the 1950s and mid-1960s, anthropology tended increasingly to model itself after the natural sciences. Some anthropologists, such as Lloyd Fallers and Clifford Geertz, focused on processes of modernization by which newly independent states could develop. Others, such as Julian Steward and Leslie White, focused on how societies evolve and fit their ecological niche—an approach popularized by Marvin Harris. Economic anthropology through the influence of Karl Polanyi focused on how traditional economics ignored cultural and social factors. In England, British social anthropology's paradigm began to fragment as Max Gluckman and Peter Worsley experimented with Marxism and others incorporated Lévi-Strauss's structuralism into their work.

Structuralism also influenced a number of developments in the 1960s and 1970s, including cognitive anthropology and componential analysis. Authors such as David Schneider, Clifford Geertz, and Marshall Sahlins developed a more fleshed-out concept of culture as a web of meaning or signification, which proved very popular within and beyond the discipline. In keeping with the times, much of anthropology became politicized through the Algerian War of Independence and opposition to the Vietnam War. By the 1970s, the authors of volumes such as Reinventing Anthropology worried about anthropology's relevance.

In the 1980s issues of power, such as those examined in Eric Wolf's Europe and the People without History, were central to the discipline. Books like Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter pondered anthropology's ties to colonial inequality, while the immense popularity of theorists such as Michel Foucault moved issues of power and hegemony into the spotlight. Gender and human sexuality became popular topics, as did the relationship between history and anthropology, and the relationship between social structure and individual agency.

In the late 1980s and 1990s, authors such as George Marcus and James Clifford pondered ethnographic authority, particularly how and why anthropological knowledge was possible and authoritative. Ethnographies became more reflexive, explicitly addressing the author's methodology and cultural positioning, and their influence on his or her ethnographic analysis. This was part of a more general trend of postmodernism that was popular contemporaneously. Currently, anthropologists have begun to pay attention to globalization, medicine and biotechnology, indigenous rights, and the anthropology of industrialized societies.

Sub-fields include:

  • Anthropology of art
  • Anthropology of religion
  • Applied anthropology
  • Cross-cultural studies
  • Cyber anthropology
  • Economic anthropology
  • Ecological anthropology
  • Ethnobotany
  • Ethnography
  • Ethnomusicology
  • Ethnozoology
  • Psychological anthropology (also known as culture-and-personality studies)
  • Political anthropology
  • Urban anthropology
  • Visual anthropology

Archaeology

Main article: Archaeology
Monte Albán archeological site

Archaeology studies human cultures through the recovery, documentation, and analysis of material remains and environmental data, including architecture, artifacts, biofacts, human remains, and landscapes. While there are numerous goals pertaining to its various sub-disciplines, the main goal of archaeology is to create the most thorough understanding of how and why both historical and prehistoric people lived, to understand the evolution of human society and civilizations, and to use knowledge of human ancestors’ history to discover insights into modern-day societies. Through such efforts, it is hoped that archaeology will support increased understanding among the various peoples of the world, and thus aid in the growth of peace and harmony among all humankind.

Archaeology as a serious academic discipline did not emerge until the end of the nineteenth century, the byproduct of a number of scientific discoveries and new theories. The discovery that the Earth was older than previously understood, and therefore that humankind had been around longer than the established timeframe of the Bible, spurred scientific curiosity in exploring human origins. Similarly, Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of the Species (1859) introduced the theory of evolution, inciting a furor of academic debate and research. Even more important for archaeology was C. J. Thomsen’s establishment of the "Three Age System," in which man’s history was categorized into three eras based on technological advancement: the Stone Age, Bronze Age, and Iron Age. The chronological history of humankind became an exciting academic field. Soon, teams of archaeologists were working around the world, discovering long-lost ruins and cities. [4]

Archaeology took form in the 1960s, when a number of academics, most notably Lewis Binford, proposed a "new archaeology," which would be more "scientific" and "anthropological." It began using hypothesis testing and scientific methods, such as the newly established dating tests, as well as focusing upon the social aspects of the findings. Archaeology became less focused on categorizing, and more on understanding how the evolution of civilization came about, later being dubbed “processual archaeology.”

In the 1980s, a new movement arose, led by the British archaeologists Michael Shanks, Christopher Tilley, Daniel Miller, and Ian Hodder, questioning processualism's appeals to science and impartiality, and emphasizing the importance of relativism, becoming known as post-processual archaeology. Further adaptation and innovation in archaeology has continued.

Contemporary sub-fields of archaeology include:

  • Ariel Archaeology
  • Archaeoastronomy
  • Archaeological Science
  • Archaeobotany
  • Archaeozoology
  • Computational Archaeology
  • Ethnoarchaeology
  • Experimental Archaeology
  • Landscape Archaeology
  • Maritime Archaeology
  • Museum Studies
  • Paleopathology
  • Taphonomy

Linguistic Anthropology

Linguistic anthropology is rooted largely in general linguistic studies which deals with the components of language, mainly phonetics, morphology, and even the kinesics of language. Linguistic anthropology grew out of cultural anthropology, when anthropologists realized what information the study of language can bring.

The first main branch of the discipline is historical linguistics, which studies the evolution of language. All languages have a genealogical tree structure that shows their evolution. For instance, modern English comes from a combination of French, Latin, and Germanic sources, which can all traces their roots back to a common origin, the Indo-European language from the steppes of Russia. The ability of anthropological linguists to trace a language's origins based on the morphological and phonetic changes also can be used to track human migration patterns. Lexicostatistical dating is the technique used for migration tracing, and one of the most famous examples is the pattern of Native American settlement thousands of years ago on such a linguistic approach.

The second major linguistic study in anthropology is called ethnolinguistics. There are two historically different approaches in the discipline, the first being the "Sapir-Whorf hypothesis," proposed in the mid-twentieth century by Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf. They argued that "Each language provides particular grooves of linguistic expression that predispose speakers of that language to perceive the world in a certain way. ... The picture of the universe shifts from tongue to tongue."[5] The other approach generally accepts that culture and language predispose people to particular perspectives, but regards language as a continually evolving phenomena that is constantly consuming different influences and changing the society's perspective. Both perspectives agree that language, as one of humankind's most distinguishing features, is a valuable source of information about culture and psychology, capable of revealing the abstract and cognitive aspects of our minds.

Politics of anthropology

Anthropology, as the study of humankind in all its dimensions, has necessarily been involved in social issues. Anténor Firmin wrote De l'égalité des races humaines (1885) as a direct rebuttal to Count de Gobineau’s polemical four-volume work Essai sur l'inegalite des Races Humaines (1853–1855), which asserted the superiority of the Aryan race and the inferiority of blacks and other people of color. Firmin’s work argued the opposite, that "all men are endowed with the same qualities and the same faults, without distinction of color or anatomical form. The races are equal" (450). Firmin grew up in Haiti, and was admitted to the Societé d’ Anthropologie de Paris in 1884, while serving as a diplomat. His persuasive critique and rigorous analysis of many of that society’s leading scholars made him an early pioneer in the so-called vindicationist struggle in anthropology. Many scholars also associate his work with the very first ideas of Pan-Africanism.

American cultural anthropology developed during the first four decades of the twentieth century under the powerful influence of Franz Boas and his students, and their struggle against racial determinism and the ethnocentrism of nineteenth-century cultural evolutionism. With the additional impact of the Great Depression and World War II, American anthropology developed a pronounced liberal-left tone by the 1950s. The "politics of anthropology" has become a pervasive concern since that time. Whatever the realities, the notion of anthropology as somehow complicit in morally unacceptable projects has become a significant topic for debate.

Explicitly political concerns have to do with anthropologists’ entanglements with government intelligence agencies, on the one hand, and anti-war politics on the other. Franz Boas publicly objected to U.S. participation in World War I, and after the war he published a brief exposé and condemnation of the participation of several American archaeologists in espionage in Mexico under their cover as scientists. But by the 1940s, many of Boas' anthropologist contemporaries were active in the allied war effort against the "Axis" (Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, and Imperial Japan). Many served in the armed forces, but others worked in intelligence (for example, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and the Office of War Information). David H. Price's work on American anthropology during the Cold War provides detailed accounts of the pursuit and dismissal of several anthropologists for their vocal left-wing sympathies. Many anthropologists (students and teachers) were active in the antiwar movement during the Vietnam War years, and a great many resolutions condemning the war in all its aspects were passed overwhelmingly at the annual meetings of the American Anthropological Association. In the decades since the Vietnam war, the tone of cultural and social anthropology, at least, has been increasingly politicized, reflecting Marxist, feminist, post-colonial, postmodern, and Foucaultian perspectives.

Notes

  1. See, for instance, the writing of Auguste Comte.
  2. Bernard G. Campbell, James D. Loy, and Kathryn Cruz-Uribe, Humankind Emerging (Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2005, ISBN 978-0205423804).
  3. William A. Haviland, Harald E. L. Prins, Dana Walrath, and Bunny McBride, Anthropology: The Human Challenge (Florence, KY: Wadsworth Publishing, 2010, ISBN 978-0495810841), 10.
  4. Paul Bahn and Colin Renfrew, Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice (New York, NY: Thames and Hudson, 2008, ISBN 978-0500287132), 25–34.
  5. Haviland et. al., 381.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Asad, Talal. Anthropology and the Colonial Encounter. Ithaca, NY: Ithaca Press, 1973. ISBN 0903729016
  • Bahn, Paul, and Colin Renfrew, Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. New York, NY: Thames and Hudson, 2008. ISBN 978-0500287132
  • Campbell, Bernard G., James D. Loy, and Kathryn Cruz-Uribe. Humankind Emerging. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 2005. ISBN 978-0205423804
  • Darnell, Regna. Invisible Genealogies: A History of Americanist Anthropology. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2001. ISBN 0803266294
  • Desai, Gaurav. Subject to Colonialism: African Self-Fashioning and the Colonial Library. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2001. ISBN 0822326353
  • Haviland, William A., Harald E. L. Prins, Dana Walrath, and Bunny McBride, Anthropology: The Human Challenge. Florence, KY: Wadsworth Publishing, 2010. ISBN 978-0495810841
  • Lewis, Herbert S. "The Misrepresentation of Anthropology and its Consequences." American Anthropologist 100 (1998).
  • Lewis, Herbert S. "Imagining Anthropology's History." Reviews in Anthropology 33 (2004).
  • Lewis, Herbert S. "Anthropology, the Cold War, and Intellectual History.” In Histories of Anthropology Annual, Vol. I, edited by Regna Darnell and Frederick W. Gleach. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2005. ISBN 978-0803266575
  • Pels, Peter, and Oscar Salemink. Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology. Ann Arbor: MI: University of Michigan Press, 2000. ISBN 0472087460
  • Price, David. Threatening Anthropology: McCarthyism and the FBI's Surveillance of Activist Anthropologists. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2004. ISBN 0822333260
  • Rabinow, Paul. Reflections on Fieldwork in Morocco. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1977. ISBN 0520035291
  • Trencher, Susan. Mirrored Images: American Anthropology and American Culture, 1960–1980. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger, 2000. ISBN 0897896734

External links

All links retrieved October 4, 2012.


General subfields of the Social Sciences
Anthropology | Communication | Economics | Education
Linguistics | Law | Psychology | Social work | Sociology

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.