Current Anthropology 1963

Brozek, Josef. Quantitative Description of Body Composition: Physical Anthropology’s “Fourth” Dimension. Current Anthropology, Vol. 4, (1) Feb., 1963, pp. 3-39.

Josef Brozek’s article concerning anthropologists’ descriptions of ancestors’ physical compositions goes into the methods traditionally used to determine body compositions of older or ancient corpses and the pitfalls to these methods. These earlier methods have led to numerous errors in determining lifestyles and activities of humans of the past. Moreover, the author discusses the many factors that have been formerly neglected and must be included when determining the actual physical composition of our ancestors. The basis of physical analysis is the understanding that body composition depends on a number of factors including activity, lifestyle, environment, aging effects and various other characteristics that simply cannot be recreated in a lab.

In lay terms (which I needed but was in short supply in this article), the author states that initially there were three categories into which physical composition was placed; ectomorphy (fat), endomorphy (thin), mesomorphy (fit). Researchers assigned body types the bone structures that best supported them. This method of labeling does not take into account health factors or what the person’s weight consisted of (muscle or fat). This is where the author explains densiometric measurements, in which tissue density must be taken into account because muscle is denser than fat. The negligence of this fact has caused researchers to assign a disproportionate weight for a person of specific volume and give the impression of an out of shape (or in shape) person when in reality the case may have been just the opposite. Tests performed on living human beings proved that two people with similar skeletal build and structure could weigh exactly the same and have two totally different body compositions. Scientists have also performed caliper tests to determine fat content, which is a very accurate method for separating muscle weight from fat weight.

Scientists have derived equations to take into account varying densities inside the body due to different organs and tissue types. These equations also put these different components into proportions that can be accounted for when measuring total body weight. Gross body weight (muscle and fat) can be calculated by scientists by taking into account stature, bideltoid (shoulder) diameter, and seven other bone diameters within the body. Somatic (physical) weight indicators take into account four variables in their measurements; body length, skeletal sturdiness, muscular development and adipose (fat) tissue. These factors, characteristics, and calculations are complicated enough with living specimens, however they become even more so when analyzing specimen with little left to measure due to decomposition.

The conclusion seems to be that with a plethora of components determining body composition, one can never be completely sure of the actual body composition of someone who has decomposed. The best way to determine body composition is to analyze what is remaining, bone structure and sturdiness. This raises many more questions than answers but provides a reality check for scientists who have thus far depended on simple ways of determining how our ancestors lived.

DOUGLAS BURTON University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

Brozek, Joseph. Quantitative Description of Body Composition: Physical Anthropology’s “Fourth Dimension.” Current Anthropology February, 1963 Vol. 4(1): 3-29.

Joseph Brozek asserts a “fourth dimension” of physical anthropology based on quantitative descriptions of body composition. His belief was that “traditional” anthropometry did not create an accurate description of the human physique. Brozek’s concern with human physique stems from the belief that the study of the human physique would yield a greater understanding of “man’s health and work capacity.” He declares that body measurements, clinical examination, and physiological assessment of chief bodily functions would lead to a mapping of humans that would lead to the betterment of physical anthropology.

Brozek outlines methodological developments that had taken place since an author had previously noted the limiting effects of body measurements in regards to total body composition ten years earlier. Brozek cites that photographic appraisal of body composition is essential in the quantitave analysis of bodily composition. He then goes into a discussion about the implications of a departure from standard weight. Skin-fold testing is mentioned as the key determinant of “fatness.” Measurements of tissue cultures to determine fatness are a repeated theme in the article. Brozek also adds that factorial analysis of body measurements will lead to an overall ‘principal dimension’ of man’s physique. The cumulative weight of the human skeletons was estimated as a result of the individual’s bone thickness. As stated by Brozek, height and circumference are also constituents exploited by anthropometrists in determining body composition.

Brozek’s article is somewhat lengthy and laden with details and calculations utilized in ascertaining a sort of scientific model intended to elicit new insights on the physique of individuals as well as “groups” of individuals. Though, he claims that the article is targeted at introducing the laymen to this revolutionary “physiological” anthropology. Following his article are a brief abstract and a list of commentaries from what appear to be fellow anthropologists.

SARAH RICHARDSON Southern Illinois University (Jonathan Hill)

Brozek, Josef. Quantitative Description of Body Composition: Physical Anthropology’s “Fourth” Dimension. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 3-39.

Any new ways of determining the stature and overall body shape of an individual can greatly help the field of anthropometry become more useful in coordination with physical anthropology. In the years prior to this article’s publication, the common practice in anthropometry was to evaluate the external features of the human form being studied. After Josef Brozek, with the assistance of many colleagues, devised new ways to recover information about body structure, a new light shown on anthropometry.

His paper’s concern is with humankind’s physique, but with more of a biologically-minded approach to study of human features. Many anthropologists already had found the use of anthropometric data very useful in the study of the human organism. Matiegka, a physical anthropologist, devised the first method of finding the body weight of individuals by the use of anthropometric data. By conducting studies to find the structure of body parts that included the skeleton, muscles, and subcutaneous adipose, Matiegka was able to find fairly significant and accurate data on the stature and body weight of various humans.

Measuring skin folds to detect amounts of adipose tissue was a way for anthropologists to supply evidence of obesity in humankind. Brozek found that the methods Matiegka instituted in examining bodies could be more precise. Brozek helped devise new calipers that used a constant pressure which increased the accuracy of skin fold measurements. This allowed anthropologists to rely on skin fold characteristics in the determination of body makeup.

Anthropometry is just one study now used in determining the makeup of the human specimen. Chemical analysis is very important in producing information about the body by a “somatolytic” means. Roentgenography of soft tissue is aided by new techniques that eliminate guess work, so that data collected is much more concrete. Developments in areas such as radiobiology, biophysics, and biomedical research have made data collecting much more of a scientific process.

As a whole, anthropometry, used in varying degrees with the other techniques talked about in Brozek’s essay, can be a useful tool in the field of physical anthropology. In the future, this tool will no doubt become more scientific and more accurate as well. This may allow students of the human body to find variation in differing races, social classes, and sexes. The development of anthropometry plays a vital role in rendering data on the unique specimens being studied.

RUSS REED Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Bryan, Alan. The Essential Morphological Basis for Human Culture. Current Anthropology June, 1963 Vol.4 (3): 297-306.

The author’s main purpose is to suggest a causality between the origin of human speech and human culture. Bryan also puts forth a theory suggesting that a primate could learn to communicate and use symbolic thoughts if four certain premises were implemented. These circumstances regarding evolutionary traits and physical instincts.

Bryan first introduces man as distinctly different from all other organisms, even our closest relatives the primates, because of the existence of culture. Culture is that which is transferable from one to another and from generation to generation. Structural differences, such as bipedalism and cortical development are then addressed. Also, language is “the essential difference” distinguishing man from others (297). Humans symbolically communicate, whereas, primates and other organisms may be able to understand certain aspects of language but are not able to communicate culture or the symbolic use of words to one another. Language itself is based in culture and represents the advancement of human society. The origin of human culture can be based on the theory that human speech simultaneously dictates the existence of a culture.

The first premise in Bryan’s theory addresses “the biological adaptations of primates, which eventually allowed the development of human culture, forms a complex interrelated system”. Primates do not possess the necessary motor devices for producing speech. Bryan’s second premise addresses the possibility of “one essential morphological feature” when together with additional brain evolution possibly could encourage “the attainment of a new stage of organization” among primates (or humans). Primates also do not naturally experience certain stages of “babbling” which, as observed in humans as well, must occur in order for language to develop properly. The third premise proposes the possibility of the proper synchronization between language development, babbling, and maturation leading to language comprehension among primates. Lastly, the fourth suggests an alignment of the ape’s “vocal apparatus” to be positioned as it appears in the human body. Thus allowing unattainable sounds of human speech to be achieved in primates (300).

The author puts forth a theory which states, if a primate could “mimic a variety of discrete speech sounds” they may then be able to master putting them together in an comprehensible fashion and “learn many human cultural patterns by the process of symbolic thought”(300).

The commentators of Bryan’s argument both praise and scrutinize the theories he presented. His article was deemed interesting by the majority of his critics. His definition of speech varies from the accepted terms used by linguists. Akhmanova says that language also is defined as the “code, the institution, while speech is the message, the act”(301). Also the concepts regarding symbolization can be interpreted in different ways by different groups of people. Andrew restructures Bryan’s premises and Wilson comments on the validity of his data and the hope that this article will spark an interest among scientists of other fields to further pursue Bryan’s suggested follow-up research.

Bryan replies with further suggestions. The first indicates that the detailed observation of primate’s behavior in the wild may lead one to encounter the beginnings of a language exemplified by the specific sounds and gestures they use. Bryan primarily addresses Andrew’s arguments. Bryan restates that the development of an erect posture among hominids was a “preadaptation” to the moment when it was advantageous for “certain hominid groups to possess the ability to make a wide variety of sounds” thus the beginning of language. He suggests expanding the field of “animal linguistics” to a more advanced study of “animal semantics”. Bryan lastly theorizes that a non-human primate may have the ability to imitate a phonetic artificial language. He hopes discussion will continue in this basic field of research (305).

WENDY LEICHT University of San Diego (Cordy-Collins)

Dobzhansky, Theodosius. Anthropology and the Natural Sciences-The Problem of Human Evolution. Current Anthropology April, 1963 Vol.4 (2): 138+146-148.

Dobzhansky’s article examines the role of evolutionary developments of humans, the various problems which arise when one studies the way people are today, and the role of anthropology. He states that mankind is engaged in both biological and cultural evolution; therefore, if anthropology is the study of man, it should aim to synthesize both biological sciences and social sciences. Very frequently, either category is neglected or underrated. Biological components are encoded in DNA while cultural heredity is passed through teaching, imitation and learning.

Dobzhansky then looks at the difficulties of examining the relationship between biological and social sciences and he stresses the idea that heredity determines developmental processes, not fixed characters or traits. It is the path which the developmental process takes which is then modified by genetic and environmental variables.

He claims then that the biological success of humans comes from the fact that they are individually free to acquire any culture and behavior, completely independent of genetic make-up. As a result of the human ability and requirement to belong to a culture, one sees the mixing of races and genetic information. This constant “diffusion” of genetic information throughout time disproves the idea of many that there is a set-number of races or sub-species evolving independently from the erectus to sapiens “grade” of human evolution.

Discussing the basic idea of natural selection and its “automatic, mechanical and blind” characteristics, he suggests that natural selection does not necessary imply improvement of the species. The dangers of biological “success” of humans include genetic and cultural explosions occurring because of population increase.

The last paragraph concludes that anthropology must be a synthesis of biology, social sciences, and the humanities in order to fulfill its function of “providing knowledge requisite for the guidance of human evolution.

MINA ELISON University of San Diego (Dr. Cordy Collins)

Dobzhansky, Theodosius. Anthropology and the Natural Sciences – The Problem of Human Evolution. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 138-148.

The author starts this article by asserting that humanity is the product of an evolutionary line stretching back to the beginning of life on earth. He then states that humanity is currently engaged in two forms of evolution, biological and cultural. The biological side of human evolution is in essence no different than that of any other species. Humans are subject to the same evolutionary mechanisms as are all other biological creatures, and human evolution is not a stagnant process, but a present and continuing one.

Humans, however, are also involved in cultural evolution. The author refutes the idea that all social and cultural traits are genetically based, as societies and cultures often change more rapidly than would be possible genetically. What he sees as the answer is a synthesis. The capacity for cultural traits are genetically based and therefore subject to evolutionary mechanisms. However, this should not be confused to mean that every cultural trait is an adaptive one or has a genetic basis. Many human behaviors have no genetic basis at all, but the very human capacity for those behaviors does.

The author concludes this article by addressing the fact that humanity has the capacity to affect its own evolution. He stresses caution in this area. He sees the choice between a “twilight” or a successful adaptation of human biology to culture and vice versa. In the end, he believes that anthropology must become a synthesis of biology, the social sciences, and the humanities.

JASON L. EDMONDS Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Dorson, Richard M. Current Folklore Theories. Current Anthropology, February 1963. Vol. 4(1): 93-112.

In his article, “Current Folklore Theories”, Richard Dorson speaks of the history and existence of folklore over many years, specifically that of twentieth century. There exist five points of view (or schools) related to folklore. These five include: Comparative Folklore Theory, National Folklore Theory, Anthropological Theory, Psychoanalytical Folklore Theory and Structural Folklore Theory. Comparative Folklore involves the “Finnish historical geographical method” (94), which rebuilds complex folktales or songs. This theory is also said to be just a matter of common sense. Comparative Folklore explores the stories of many lands and compares them to one another. The next theory is National Folklore. This concentrates on the distinctive qualities of folklore within one country, not many countries. Dorson points out the different views of these tales from Russia, Hungary, and America and how folklore is seen in each country. After National Folklore is Anthropological Theory. The anthropologist separates the folklore tales into parts, so to better understand them. The separations include: content, function, and style. Following Anthropological is Psychoanalytical Folklore Theory. The readings from this theory substitute sexual symbolism in the nineteenth century for phenomena. The orthodox folklorist disagree most with this theory. It focuses mainly on dreams and fairy tales. The last theory is the Structural Folklore Theory. This concept centers on the style and form of oral literature. The format of the text in folklore stories are explored and analyzed.

ANTONETTE CUNANAN University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

Dorson, M. Richard. Current Folklore Theories. Current Anthropology February, 1963 Vol.4(1):93-113.

Dorson explores four contemporary theories associated with folklore: 1) comparative, 2) national, 3) anthropological, and 4) psychoanalytical. Each of the four theories are defined and discussed, given examples, and refuted and critiqued.

Comparative theory, known throughout Dorson’s paper as “Finnish”, is deemed to be the most empirical theory of the four. This Finnish method takes a historical-geographical approach, making comparisons based on all variations of each element of folklore in an attempt to reconstruct its history. Focusing on common themes, the comparative theory searches the many internationally varied tales for oldest traits. Since folklore tales vary as a direct result of geographic change in location and evolution of time, all variations must link back to one common time and place.

The general focus of national theory is on the distinctive qualities of folklore in each individual country. National theory depends on each country’s cultural history and ideology because each country carries diverse opinions and attitudes in regards to folklore. Some of these differing attitudes include the idea of manipulating folklore for political gain or solely to enhance national traditions and customs. Dorson focused on five countries’ ideologies about folklore: Russia, America, Hungary, Germany, and Japan. Russian folklore, rooted in Marxist principles, was exploited to advance communism, while Germany was the first to make political assets off folklore. In the 1930’s, under Hitler, “massive amounts of folkloric accounts of the Nazi concept of a Herrenvolk (“volk” meaning nation, where Hitler stressed racial unity), a mystical bond of blood and tongue, culture and tradition,” was published. Hungary used folklore to show distinct characteristics of their country from similarities with other countries. In addition, patriotic America used folklore to promote nationalism, and Japan used folklore for historical-reconstructionism.

Anthropological theory focuses on folklore in non-literate cultures, like African and indigenous cultures. Many anthropologists believe these folkloric accounts form ethnographies of individual cultures. Anthropologically, folklore functions as a mediator for political decisions, validates conduct, releases emotions, and much more in cultural context. Also, anthropological theory applies content, function, and style to the analytical processes of folklore tales.

Psychoanalytical theory is a Freudian-based look into folklore. Contemporarily, this theory substitutes sexual symbolism for the preceding heavenly phenomena. The folklore of this theory changed “from heavenly battle to earthy strivings of male and female.” This approach focused more on the modern sense of men and women’s struggles in life as opposed to the traditional themes of heavenly, mystical, and make-believe, non-realistic occurrences.

In general, Dorson gives a plethora of information on this topic, which proves slightly overwhelming. First, he gives a general overview of what defines each theory, follows with several in-depth insights and examples, and ends with critiques from various scholars.

JAMIE LYNN HOLTMANN Southern Illinois University Carbondale (Dr. Jonathan Hill)

Dorson, Richard M. Current Folklore Theories. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 93-112.

Folklore research in recent years has been done using several different theories. Most folklore research is done in other countries, as the United States affects an air of disinterest, and anthropologists place little stock in the oral tradition. A main theory is of the comparative folklore tradition. This is based upon the Finnish historicalgeographical method. Based in the principles of diffusionism, the comparative method traces back all of the versions of a story to its founding. This method may encompass much of the world, as a story crosses cultural barriers. The comparative method is the most dominant, though recently it has begun to give way to other theories. The comparative method relies heavily on repetitive formulas, and thus does not examine ballads very often. The comparative method advanced the usage of the variant, and systemized the gathering of data from many sources. The comparative method does not consider style, political theory, or culture differences.

National folklore theories do, however. These arise usually in small countries trying to isolate their culture from others. National folklore is also used by governments as a form of propaganda. In Soviet Russia, peasant folklore was manipulated so that Marxist theories were evident. Hitler commanded Germany’s folklorists to compile material espousing the greatness that is the Aryan race. Hungarian national folklore was revived to give a war-torn Hungary a national identity. In Japan national folklore is used to reconnect to the past. American folklore was not important until the post-war greatness. The heroes of Paul Bunyan, Johnny Appleseed, and others were unheard of until the 1920’s. Decades later, in the 1950’s, the heroes were found to have been manufactured by the mass media. Yet these still have merit in that they show what appeals to the American public. In this “fakelore,” American’s hopes and dreams are presented.

American anthropologists show little interest in oral traditions, considering them to be too untrustworthy. Franz Boas was one of the few who saw value in oral traditions, as they are the folklore of nonliterate societies. However, Boas recorded the tales passively, making no questions or comments. His student, Ruth Benedict, did and found that a culture’s identity lies within its folklore. According to her, to understand a culture, the examiner must “possess an intimate knowledge of a given culture and a full record of its narrative traditions” (102). Cultural anthropologists do use oral traditions more often now, for Benedict’s reason. The anthropological folklorist is similar to the comparative folklorist, but searches for psychological attitudes within the tribe. To do this, content, function, and style are analyzed.

Yet another folklore theory has been introduced since the early 1900’s: the psychoanalytical folklore theory. This Freudian-based theory searches for the earthly battles of male and female rather that the heavenly battles of good and evil. Carl Jung also applied folklore to his theories, as a form of symbolism. Structural folklore has also stepped into the ring. It seeks to follow the oral tradition, by recognizing the fact that each telling is slightly different and can be traced back, giving information about the culture at the time. It does not follow the methods of structural linguistics too well, and is has yet to be proven effective.

Dorson presents a very well put together essay that follows the history and usages of the folklore theory. His evidence is fairly pertinent, and does not overwhelm the reader.

EVELYN BROWN Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Eggan, Fred. Cultural Drift and Social Change. Current Anthropology October 1963, 347-355

Fred Egann opens his article, “Cultural Drift and Social Change”, with a complex, abstract analysis of cultural drift and a comparison of linguistic drift. Using the words of Meliville J. Herskovits (1948), he states his thesis: the unnoticeable daily activities in a culture ultimately create change. Since culture evolves as a result of social, political, economic, and religious change, Egann’s thesis includes Edward Sapir’s concept of linguistic drift and G.P. Murdock’s concept of the evolution of social organization. Unlike Sapir’s view stating linguist drift as a separate historically-based phenomena from culture drift, David F. Aberle notes their parallel structure because they both have direction and consistency. Egann does not resolve the actual discrepancies between these two ideas of thought; rather he states that the opposing viewpoints are a result of rising awareness about culture drift and its importance. In order to illustrate these ideas, Egann includes a lengthy example from the Mountain Province of Northern Luzon, which has undergone change over geographical lines and dialect groups as a result of differences in agriculture, settlement patterns, and social institutions. He notes that the basic unit is the village and explains that one can see the differences in village organization and kinship relations in the Ifugao and the Ilocano. The basic parallels of this analysis are refereed to in his analysis of the Souther Kalinga and Northern Kalinga, dry rice-cultivating societies. Egann notes the physical variation, the phonetic variation, and the kinship variation, but it is the role of new rice technology that has created a cultural change. By introducing irrigation and terracing the population has grown, the settlement pattern has stabilized, a higher economic level has been achieved, and a larger gap in wealth has resulted – thus creating a class-like social structure. Conversely, in the Bontok area the shift to wet rice agriculture rapidly increased the population, thus making large, concentrated settlements necessary. This became problematic due to the lack of overall political structure; it has redefined territorial organization in this area while reducing the range and strength of the kinship structure. The discussion of these peoples introduces the idea that social change may not be as fluid as linguistic change and that social change must also be analyzed in terms of environment and internal adaptation. Ultimately, the analysis of the Mountain Province of Northern Luzon reinforces Egann’s belief that shifts, whether historical or evolutionary, will produce socio-cultural differences, which need to be reviewed from both external and internal perspectives.

KATHERINE MCKENNA University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

Eggan, Fred. Cultural Drift and Social Change. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 347-355.

Eggan’s article is an analysis and review of Melville J. Herskovits’ notion of cultural drift. Cultural drift occurs as small changes accumulate in a people’s beliefs and behaviors and thus in the character and form of social life. More rapid change may be caused by cultural innovations or external factors. Herskovits’ opinion is that cultural drift in conjunction with historical accident can be an important process of change.

Eggan also includes other anthropologists’ notions of cultural change. Edward Sapir views drift of language and culture as being unrelated while David F. Aberle notes parallels between the two. G. P. Murdock believes drift is a process involved in the evolution of social organization. Some, like A. L. Kroeber, find little use for the notion of cultural drift.

Eggan admits that no anthropologist, including Herskovits, has solved the dilemma of whether directional cultural drift is history or evolution. He does, however, offer useful suggestions for future anthropologists who may want to pursue the notion. One is to have more concern for inner dynamics and adaptive processes. Another is to analyze using a historical perspective. Finally, one must consider the role of the individual in social and cultural change.

I found the article to be fairly straightforward and to the point. Although I didn’t agree with all the author’s ideas on this matter, the article was easy to follow, though definitely not couched in layperson’s terms.

DANIEL MCCALLISTER Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Esin, Ufkun and Benedict, Peter. Recent Developments in the Prehistory of Anatolia.Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 339-346.

This article is intended to summarize recent investigations into the prehistory of Anatolia. The excavations written about stretch from foraging to food-producing populations. Not many full-scale excavations of sites of the Pleistocene era have been undertaken. This article further intends to make already published material accessible to English speakers. Of the recent excavations, food-gathering and food-collecting periods have produced flint tools, while obsidian becomes more common with the development of food production. Both excavations and surface finds have shown that people who once lived in Anatolia made flint tools in such styles as the core-biface, flake and blade technique, and Levalloiso-Mousterian. People seem to have lived in caves during the food-gathering stage, as well as in open areas. This paper attempts to provide a stratigraphic scheme for Anatolia. However, this scheme is less reliable than it would be if the excavated collections were classified systematically. The earliest archaeological

stratigraphy for Anatolia exists on the Mediterranean sea coast. It provides data pertaining to the food-gathering stage. In this sequence is Karain cave, which was excavated by Kokten. This cave has eight layers. The outermost chamber, Chamber I, contains loose thick cultural remains and bits of fossilized animals. Chamber III contains smooth, engraved walls, which Kokten dates to the Upper Paleolithic. Levalloisian and Chellean tools were discovered in layers VII and VI. Hand axes discovered here were made of limestone, and the faunal remains suggest a warm climate. Layer IV contains a flake tool industry and some Acheulean hand axes. Bits of pine and oak have been discovered here, in addition to interglacial species of animals. Layer III contains Mousterian, Levalloisian, Micoquian, and Acheulean tools. Layer II contains a blade-tool industry that is classified as Aurignacian. A kitchen-midden found in this section contained the tooth of a juvenile Neanderthal, but modern human remains were discovered there as well. Engravings have been discovered here.

There are caves near Karain called Carkini and Okuzin which express a similar stratigraphic sequence. They both contain Neolithic pottery. In Okuzin, a human skeleton was found. Another cave in this group is Beldibi, which is located near the sea. The cave is formed in an over-hanging cliff with what appear to be ochre figures painted on it. There are considered to be six cultural layers to this cave, which have been designated as A-F. Layer A contains modern, classical, and prehistoric cultural debris. Layer B contains primitive pottery alongside a varied flint industry. These finds have been very interesting to scholars. The pottery is burnished and may represent an early ceramic tradition. The flint industry is microlithic and includes micro-burins, lunates, tanged points, tranches, axes, trapezes, stemmed knives, arrowheads, and burins with patina. Layer C contains shells, bits of fossilized bone, pieces of a human skull, and the horn of a deer. Bits of harpoons, spearheads, and bone tools have also been found here. Present also are ochre-painted pebbles. From Layer C to D the flint tool industry changes to that of the Upper Paleolithic, containing Aurignacian and Mousterian tools. Human skull bones were found here.

Another cave in this area is Belbasi, which is made of Cretaceous limestone. It is located near the sea. It contains three main layers, the upper of which has been disturbed. It contains materials that are modern, classical, and prehistoric. The second layer contains truncated points, flake points, flakes and blades, blade points, angle burins, bec-de-flute burins, small backed blades, borers, small tanged points on flakes and blades, triangular flake points, microburins and one Heuan point. Bits of mountain goat, deer, and human bone have been preserved. The bottom layer contains few blade points but many core-scrapers.

A blade tool industry has been found in the Psidian Lake area. This site is considered to have nine cultural layers. Layers I through V contain ash and limestone pieces, and are dated to the classical period. Limestone fragments with sand were discovered in Layer VI. The next two layers are thought to represent the Upper Paleolithic. Layer IX contains pebbles but no cultural materials. Samandagi is a cave that contains a stratigraphical sequence of blade tools. These tools are similar to Aurignacian tools. It contains five cultural layers. The first correlates to the Roman era when it was used as a stone quarry. In Layers II and III there are traces of a flint tool industry. Layers III and IV contain nothing but stones. The fossils here suggest the interglacial Riss-Wurm period. It is thought to have in later times been inhabited by upper Levalloiso-Mousterian-tool making peoples.

The authors offer various detailed time charts given by Turkish scholars. They continue by suggesting that in southern, middle, and northern Anatolia there is evidence of food-collecting that may have been concurrent with that in

Palestine. These peoples are thought to have been replaced by early cultivators. Ideas about the natural habitat zone may need to be broadened to include parts of Anatolia which produced animals and plants that were later domesticated. Scholars must determine which zones could have supported a foraging lifestyle, and which could have supported food production. This could help explain whether two cultural systems could have evolved in one area rather than development occuring in a unilinear fashion. There are many signs of the development of food production. The natural habitat zone, which contained the ancestors of modern domestic plants and animals, could be evaluated based on how useful it would have been to people, and how people might have adapted to it. The amount of obsidian increases through time, which suggests trade beginning during the intensification of food-collecting. As other finds in the area are made, it is probable that evidence for a transition into food-production will become better represented. Other regions, in contrast, express a continuation of food-collecting. The focus of new research should concern cultural change and persistence and try to discover which adaptations of intensified food-collecting and food production are important in ecology. Pottery evidence has drawn no conclusive link between early food production and village-farming, but it is expected that new evidence will be uncovered that will express continuity from the stages of food-collecting to food-producing. The shift to food production does not appear to be the product of the diffusion of village-farming communities. This implies the necessity of broadening the natural habitat zone to include Anatolia.

LEE ANN LOWE Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Esin, Ufuk and Peter Benedict. Recent Developments in the Prehistory of Anatolia. Current Anthropology October, 1963 Vol.4(4):339-346

Esin and Benedict are presenting archaeological information about several sites in Anatolia. Flint tools, pottery shards and faunal remains are examined from cave sites, open sites and surface finds. From these artifacts and ecofacts, food-gathering stages of people living in prehistoric Anatolia are surmised.

In prehistoric Anatolia there is an evolution of food-gathering stages. Within these sites, different layers of excavation represent different types of human or pre-human occupation. In these stratigrahic layers modification of material culture can be examined. The cave sites of Karian, Beldibi, Psidian Lake, and Samandagi are examined along with the rock shelter of Belbasi and the open site of Baradiz.

The primary focus of this essay is the flint tool industry. At the Karian site there are eight defined stratigraphic cultural layers. In this site the flint tools found decreased in size as time progresses. This is not a typical progression of the flint tool industry. At the Samandagi site there are five defined cultural and tool industry types ranging from Roman to Levallloso-Mousterian.

Cultural and technical development of prehistoric Anatolia can be studied using statigraphy and geochronology. There are many sites in Anatolia that present the evolution of the food-gathering stages, tool industry and pottery. By researching the artifacts and ecofacts of these sites this evolution can be studied.

There were no commentaries or author’s reply accompanying this article.

JESSICA CLARK University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

Fischer, J.L., “The Sociopsychological Analysis of Folktales,” Current Anthropology, Vol. 4, No.3., June 1963, pp. 235-295

In the article, “The Sociopsychological Analysis of Folktales,” Fischer analyzes the structure and major developmental elements of folktales within a society. Utilizing three major components: Psychological and sociological functions, structure of the tale and symbolism make for the necessary counterparts indicative of a folktale. Each component is interdependent of the other. The objective relies on the interpretation of the relationship between the structure of the tale based on its content, the form of narrative and audience amongst the cultural ideals, social system and personality weighed by symbolic and psychological structures within the “tale-bearing” society. Narration and its imagery are the acting devices in which folktales convey the essence, social and psychological values of a society.

JILL JOHNSON University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

Fischer, J.L. The Sociopsychological Analysis of Folktales. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 235-295.

What is a folktale? Fischer defines folktales as, “any traditional, dramatic, oral narrative.” Some are told in order to pass on specific information, and some are just for entertainment. There are numerous types of folktales, but Fischer focuses only on oral stories, not written literature. Anthropological interest in folktales has been gaining over the last two centuries, mainly in the United States, Britain, and France. In the U.S., folktales have been looked at in relation to how they influence personality and culture. Other countries also collect and study data attained from folktale analysis.

There are three systems of variables that are capable of being analyzed. They are: the tale (folktale), personality of narrator and audience (psychological), and the social system (sociological). Tales can change meaning (either in a major or minor way), they can last for many years without change, and they can even disappear. Sometimes tales are created to illustrate a special event that is worthy of remembering.

There are also tales that originate from dreams. Tales contain an ample amount of symbolism that serves to intensify the story and is used to invoke emotions or actions. There are three types of symbols: conventional, accidental, and universal. Tale structure has two aspects: syntagmatic (relationship between successive segments) and paradigmatic (group classification of individual segments). These two aspects aid in the arrangement the tale is telling.

Tales also serve a psychological function. These functions are either cognitive (to inform the individual), affective (to get a response), or conative (to persuade). The sociological functions of tales are to give an ideal model for society to follow. Even though tales are not purely fiction or non-fiction, but a mixture of both, they serve as a vehicle to reality. Fischer suggests several methods that are helpful in researching tales. They are the same methods that any good ethnographer uses in his or her data gathering.

There are 17 individuals who commented on Fischer’s paper. The majority of the comments give praise to Fischer, saying that Fischer’s analysis is the most accurate and informative publication ever on folktales. A few people do give a little criticism on certain things that Fischer did not point out. Some question Fischer’s methods and statements. Comments were made by:

Catherine H. Berndt, Ann Chowning, Benjamin N. Colby, Stanley Diamond, Alan Dundes, Munro S. Edmonson, Melville Jacobs, Margaret Lantis, David P. McAllester, Raven I. McDavid, Jr. Lord Raglan, Alfred G. Smith, Katherine Spencer, Melford E. Spiro, Theodore Stern, Stith Thompson, and Francis Lee Utley

Fischer replied to many of the comments made by the previous people. His reply can also be considered an extension to the original paper because he gives more explanation as to why he said and did certain things in the paper. The paper would not be complete without the comments and the reply by Fischer.

JASON LEE PARRISH Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Gluckman, Max. Papers in Honor of Melville J. Herskovits: Gossip and Scandal. Current Anthropology June, 1963 Vol.4 (3):307-316.

Max Gluckman’s article explains the importance of gossip and scandal as ageless characteristics universal to human society. He argues for their practical attributes as unifying social phenomena, providing a means for the transmittance of virtuous behavior and community values. Gluckman also notes the importance of gossip and scandal in the process of leadership determination, allowing the community to gauge one’s leadership abilities without any personal affront. He argues that engaging in gossip leads to a communal relating not achieved by those outside the group, and points out that the exclusion of those ignorant of group gossip is not unusual. Gluckman supports his conclusions largely through anthropological studies of various small groups, with an emphasis on the Makah Indians of the Pacific Northwest. At one time forced to assimilate into American society, the Makah nevertheless managed to retain a separate group identity. Gossip has worked in various ways within Makah society, such as by maintaining important class distinctions that seem unintelligible to those outside the group. Furthermore, gossip and criticism direct the daily conduct of each member. Gluckman also refers to some characteristics of gossip use within community life, pointing out that only members of a community are allowed to participate in the gossip of that group, setting outsiders apart from those considered worthy of group membership. Likewise, he explains how scandal within a group can work toward the positive aim of group unification amidst other, possibly competing, groups. The more select the group, the more gossip and scandal will be inherent within it. In order to become a part of the social strata of any group (including professions), one must acquire the knowledge of gossip and scandal pertinent to that group. While Gluckman admits that gossip and scandal can have a negative impact and even disband groups at times, he stresses that this is likely only if communal unity has already been compromised.

MEGHAN LITTLE University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

Greenman, E.F. The Upper Paleolithic and the New World. Current Anthropology February, 1963 Vol.4(1):41-91.

The Pleistocene Epoch, beginning nearly two million years ago and ending 11,000 years ago, was a time when glaciers covered a vast majority of the Earth allowing people to move freely across the oceans. Artifacts are identifiable according to geologic time, in addition to the space in which discovered to be from. In the New World, the St. Lawrence River Valley, Newfoundland, the Artic, and the North American Southwest are set in comparison to France and Spain in the Old World. E.F. Greenman examines artifacts from the Upper Palaeolithic cultures that existed in these regions during the Pleistocene uncovering evidence that leads him to believe the Bering Straits may have been only one source of transportation between worlds.

After careful analysis of artifacts, Greenman presents evidence that diffusion of cultural traits into the New World by way of boat. In order to test this hypothesis, the author provides detailed descriptions, including references to sketches of each artifact.

House structures, carved and painted animal figures on cave walls, bone engravings, arrowheads, canoes, and kayaks show how the Upper Palaeolithic and the New World contain traits characteristic of Old World cultures. The now extinct Beothuk Indians traveled by canoe to reach Newfoundland. Greenman draws this conclusion by vigorously comparing the drawings of the Beothuk to those pictured on the Bay of Biscay. This type of information provides the reader with a glimpse of the Upper Palaeolithic world, in which one is able to decide whether the evidence is conclusive.

In the commentary following the article, many find his research to be inconclusive; nevertheless, the data provides an in depth analysis of Upper Palaeolithic cultural artifacts.

MARCIE BREWER Southern Illinois University (Jonathan Hill)

Greenman, E. F. The Upper Paleolithic and the New World. Current Anthropology February, 1963 Vol.4(1):41-88


Greenman argues that there is a direct link between the cultures of the Upper Paleolithic of France and Spain and North America. Greenman has a multitude of evidence linking the cultures of the St. Lawrence Drainage area, Newfoundland, Eskimos of Artic North America and the Southwestern region of North America to the cultures of Upper Paleolithic France and Spain emphasizing the Biscay Bay area. Greenman believes that there was an influx of people and culture from southwestern Europe by way of the North Atlantic during the Late Pleistocene Period.

First, Greenman analyzes the St. Lawrence drainage area. Greenman defines this area as “extend(ing) from the mouth of the St. Lawrence River to northern Minnesota and from the height of land between the Hudson Bay and the Great Lakes to northern Indiana, Ohio, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maine and the Maritime Provinces of Canada (42).” The connection of the St. Lawrence drainage cultures to the others is found in the archaeological record through art and canoe forms. Two art form studied are the forms of the hourglass shape used to portray the human form and the stylistic form of the double curve. The second area Greenman analyzes is Newfoundland. He examines art forms represented in Beothuk pendants and cave paintings. Canoe and kayak forms, housing structures and burial staffs are also studied. The third area of analysis is the Eskimos of Artic North America. The two main areas of focus of the Eskimo culture are art and tool styles. The forth and final area of analysis is the Southwest which includes “Lower California in Mexico, Arizona, central and southern California and New Mexico (54).” Art, flint blades, and burial staffs of the Southwest are examined. Two predominant art forms studied the double curve motif and human figures.

Greenman interconnects the cultures of these areas through the mass of archaeological data from southwestern Europe, the St. Lawrence drainage, Newfoundland, Eskimos of Artic North America and the Southwest. Using this data Greenman traces the migration of culture in the Late Pleistocene Period from southwestern Europe to North America by way of seafaring across the Northern Atlantic.


There are many critics of Greenman’s arguments and conclusions. The criticisms include an arbitrary use of ethological criteria, strength of thesis and misinterpretation of data.


Greenman replies in support of his arguments by reiterating evidence of canoe and kayak forms along with the artistic links of the double cure and hourglass art forms.

JESSICA CLARK University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

E.F. Greenman. The Upper Paleolithic and the New World. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 41-91.

E.F. Greenman presents evidence in North America of Upper Paleolithic culture contact from Spain and France in his 1963 article “The Upper Paleolithic and the New World” in a volume of Current Anthropology. He also talks about the four places where this evidence derived, describing in great detail the chosen artifacts and their similar counterparts throughout Europe.

The first place Greenman talks about is the St. Lawrence drainage, which extends from Minnesota throughout New England to Canada. The main trait that shows some Upper Paleolithic evidence is the presence of the “double curve motif, which is associated with floral patterns” (42). It is confined mostly to the area of the Algonquian tribes. The motif is found in Europe around A.D. 1500, but the author believes that this motif is an original to North America. He later compares the double curve to the curvilinear styles of Christian Europe. Caves in Wisconsin contained human forms and animal charcoal paintings and engravings that resembled those of Spain. Greenman, though, denies that contact with Spain had any effect on the art, and insists that this art was “pure” (44).

The next area Greenman looks at is Newfoundland. The archaeological objects under study here were pendants, most made of bone and a few of ivory. Upon these objects were found incised lines and prongs, but no circular patterns were observed. Possible fishhooks or harpoons were also discovered. Canoe-shaped articles were also recovered from the area. The author also mentions the appearance of wigwam features. Paintings that are similar to these objects have been found on European cave walls, as well as on artifacts. Much of the basis of Greenman’s work came from an Indian informant named Shanawdithit, one of the last remaining of the Beothuk peoples, who were native to the Newfoundland area.

Thirdly, he talks about the Eskimo culture. Many people equate the Eskimos with the original Paleolithic people, who first crossed over the Bering Strait, because of the great similarities of tools and art. The appearance of the “man-worm” is also present on many other Paleolithic sites throughout North America, as well as in Europe. The “man-worm” is also a mythical creature in Eskimo culture. Flint and blades are associated with influence from the French Upper Paleolithic, for similar blades were found in both North America and France.

Another area Greenman looks at is the North American Southwest, including southern parts of California, Arizona, and New Mexico, as well as Mexico. Many traits, he says, are similar to those in Newfoundland, and also to those of the Eskimos. Similar pictures of humans are found throughout these regions. Staffs with special imprints on them were also discovered, and Greenman associates them with Spain. Arrowheads from New Mexico seem to be affiliated with the Eskimo, according to the author. The double curve motif makes an appearance here as well. Petroglyphs found in Mexico appear to be connected to a painting on a cave wall in Spain.

Greenman next evaluates his results in a drawn-out part of his article. In this section, he reviews the origins of the similarities of the objects from the different areas. Most of what Greenman mentions in this article is speculation on how certain ideas traveled from one county to another; he uses other speculative work to back up his hypotheses. It appears to this reader that the only evidence Greenman has for his reasoning is the artifacts that share similarities with other places throughout Europe. Similar traits may indicate contact with other cultures, but they by no means prove that one culture’s artifacts are due to someone else’s ideas.

Following Greenman’s article in Current Anthropology is a rather lengthy section from various people from all over the world, commenting on Greenman’s suggestion that Upper Paleolithic artifacts in North America can be sourced to either Spain or France. The majority of the comments are similar to my critique: not many agreed with his interpretation of the origins of the artifacts. Greenman does have a reply to these comments, though. He makes one comment: “Who knows, in the context of my thesis, how the western traits got where they are,” and suggests that there are no set routes for such an occurrence (87). Greenman failed to clarify this in his article, which is why so many people had problems with it. Had he stated this in his original paper, perhaps the context of his research would not have been totally unsupported.

PAULA ANDRAS Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Hall, K. R. L. Tool-using Performances as Indicators of Behavioral Adaptability. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 479-494.

Hall’s article is an analysis of animal tool-using behaviors in situations that include agonism, feeding habits, courtship display, and body care. Examples of agonistic behavior were apes’ and other non-human primates’ use of tools for repelling intruders. Hall claims that close analysis of previous studies shows that non-human primates are the only animals besides humans who use tools as a means of defense. He argues against the notion that agonistic tool use behaviors in apes are transitional to those in humans, on the basis that there is not enough evidence to support this.

Hall considers tool use in feeding habits and concludes that it is not as complex as in agonistic displays. He states that the act of a gull using a rock to break an oyster is not as behaviorally complex as that of an ape using a stick to fend off a baboon. However, a wasp using pebbles to build a nest and birds painting with saliva are examples of behavioral complexity. Hall cites an interesting study of elephant body care. Apparently, elephants have been known to pick up sticks with their trunks in order to scratch at hard-to-reach areas. Hall believes that this also is an example of behavioral complexity.

This article was extremely fascinating and very well written. I had little problem following the author’s points and this, together with the subject matter, made for an enlightening article about the tool usage and adaptability of primates.

DANIEL MCCALLISTER Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Hallowell, A. Irving American Indians, White and Black: The Phenomenon of Transculturalization. Current Anthropology December 1963 Vol. 4(5): (519-532)

Hallowell describes his early days as a young anthropologist who knew very little of the relations between the whites and the Indians. The storied history of the new settlers to America, who simply settled and took over the “savages” land, while converting them to their more sophisticated lifestyle, seems now to have less credibility than originally thought. Hallowell documents numerous times where whites have actually become a part of “Indianization,” in which they adopted the native culture of the Indians. The query is addressed as to why many whites were attracted to the primitive lifestyle, and yet no Indians seemed to cross their own cultural lines to the domesticated way of life. The Indians were shown to be accepting to these new members despite any racial differences. Many of these new members actually rose to power and fostered large families within the Indian lineages. Hallowell shows the example of Joseph Louis-Gill, who was the first white Indian chief of the Abenaki tribe. Also considerable were the incredible numbers of Negroes both free and of slave origin that fled to join the Indian community.

These actions were part of a term that Hallowell coins in his writings as “transculturalization” in order to accurately describe this movement. There are the many factors that had to be assessed in order to describe the varying degrees of transculturalization. Such factors were age and the amount of exposure to the Indian way of life that played roles into how much tranculturalization could occur. Through these criteria Hallowell clearly notes this phenomenon poorly documented that swept across the settlers at the inception of the New World settlements.

BRIAN REBOLLEDO University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

Hallowell, A. Irving. American Indians, White and Black: The Phenomenon of Transculturalization. Current Anthropologist 1963 Vol.4: 519-531.

Indianization refers to a process by which people have essentially become Indian through the adoption of language and custom. This idea was thoroughly explored by American novelists from the eighteenth century to the present day. Hallowell points out that this topic has been neglected by intellectual studies. He introduces Negroes into this phenomenon but notes that writers of fiction specifically neglected them.

Indianization is representative of a wider phenomenon that Hallowell terms transculturalization. This refers to the detachment of a person from their original group and the adoption of a new group’s values and practices. Whereas acculturation refers to cultural change, transculturalization involves a psychological change in consciousness as well. The extent of transculturalization relies on several things. The age the progression began, previous mind-set towards the new society, time of habitation, motivational causes, and the character of the roles played are just a few. Transculturalization may occur at any time so long as conditions conducive to its occurrence are present. In America, two specific kinds of detachment from one’s culture exist: involuntary and voluntary detachments.

Hallowell discusses why Indian societies were so receptive to outsiders. Before white contact, Indians practiced adoption of enemies captured in warfare. This practice was continued with the capture of white settlers, sometimes with the addition of ransom and the possibility of return. From a functional standpoint, it was necessary to socialize outsiders into Indian society. Social organization and kinship structures provided the framework for this socialization. White society did not share the same organization and values that allowed for Indian assimilation and eventually transculturalization. There was no form of cross-cultural adoption and racial prejudices would not allow Indians to become the white man’s equal. These racial prejudices also made it possible for Negroes to be more likely to adopt the Indian way of life. Although most were introduced as slaves to the Indians, many stayed due to the opportunity for advancement and the better conditions under which slavery was practiced.

LAUREN MILLER Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Hughes, H. Stuart. History, the Humanities, and Anthropological Change. Current Anthropology April 1963. Vol.4 (2):140-145.

Hughes examines the paradox of many people who study contemporary human culture. It is the differentiation between understanding the physiological and cultural aspects of humanity. Differing beliefs exist between historians and cultural anthropologists because of the gap between physical and cultural anthropology. He looks at widespread views of historians and humanists who tend to believe that physical and instinctual changes have not occurred within the confines of historical time, but rather these changes occurred in “pre-history”. Historians also tend to rely heavily upon “documents” as opposed to architectural remains or folklore.

Hughes presents three approaches in which anthropologists, historians and humanists alike can explore the evidences of physical adaptations and instinctual change within the limits of historical time. The first approach is the cumulative record of technological change. The second approach is the scattered evidence in deformations, diseases, and the adaptations of the senses that make up the foundations of psycho-physiological history and the third being language.

The evidence of physiological and instinctual change can be found as consequence of changed physical conditions of contemporary life in the example of increased incidences of heart disease. In his conclusion, Hughes challenges humanists and historians to look more seriously into psychophysical evolution which occurs today as it did in the past.

MINA ELISON University of San Diego (Dr. Cordy Collins)

Janowitz, Morris. Anthropology and the Social Sciences. Current Anthropology April 1963 Vol.4 (2): 139+149-154.

Janowitz’s article presents a defense to the argument of anthropology as a distinctive social science, while also emphasizing the internal variations in anthropology. It functions as a distinct social science because of its holistic approach to subject matter, concerning itself with a unity in social organization and idea that human behavior needs to be analyzed as a social system. Anthropology is also a distinct social science because of its direct and prolonged observation period which allows anthropologists to gather data in a holistic manner to obtain accurate information.

While being a distinct social science, Janowitz also sees anthropology as a converging discipline in two aspects: theoretical incorporations and theoretical transformations. Theoretical incorporations involve the “borrowing or assimilation of specific concepts and variables without fundamentally changing the anthropologists underlying orientation. Theoretical transformation is the “transposition of an idea or set of concepts from one discipline to another which has the consequence of fundamentally restructuring an intellectual approach.” Although the idea of anthropology being distinct and convergent seem to conflict, Janowitz uses this paradox to discuss the weaknesses of anthropology in one part displayed in the imbalance between data collection and theory construction. Janowitz claims there is a persistent reluctance to relate these theoretical orientations to the specific propositions which must be investigated by researchers in the field.

Anthropology is a distinct science because it does not limit itself to a narrow view of social structure, and is convergent because it includes it recognizes other types of societal organizations, such as political sociology. Janowitz concludes the article stating that the future of anthropology requires a balance between its distinctive and converging elements with the other social sciences.

MINA ELISON University of San Diego (Dr. Cordy Collins)

Janowitz, Morris. Anthropology and the Social Sciences. Current Anthropology April, 1963 Vol. 4(2): 139 + 149-154.

Morris Janowitz explains anthropology and the social science. He argued that the spread of modern technology means that anthropology no longer has a distinctive subject matter except as it relates to history. So, he argued that it is meaningless to insist such an argument. He explained why this is meaningless because it can hardly contribute to the development of either anthropology or to other social sciences. Also, social scientists have been strongly influenced by anthropology and anthropologists. He was also obtained anthropology’s idea and history. Therefore, he argued influences as a point of departure for assessing the relations between anthropology and the social sciences in his article. Moreover, he strongly expresses anthropology and social science are close relationship and anthropology is a distinctive social science.

First of all, he explains that anthropologists are deeply concerned with holistic approach to their subject matter and with an approach. He describes it as configurational analysis. Configurational analysis is involved in the plethora of terms and concepts, such as functionalism, cultural patterns, cultural systems, institutional analysis, social stratification, and social structure.

Finally, anthropology and social science are advantageous relationship. This is because both anthropology and sociology influence each other.

In conclusion, this article is hard to reading because there are many difficult words and this article is like research paper. However, I could study the relationship between anthropology and social sciences. Particularly, I could understand social science involved anthropology idea and empirical idea. Moreover, I want to study social science too because it is important to study anthropology.

MASAYUKI MIYAZAWA Southern Illinois University Carbondale (Jonathan Hill)

Janowitz, Morris. Anthropology and the Social Sciences. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 139, 149-154.

This article discusses anthropology as a “specialized intellectual discipline” and“ evaluates the relations between Anthropology and the social sciences” (139). The body of the work is divided into two main sections: Anthropology as a distinctive social science and Anthropology as a converging discipline. As a social scientist himself, Janowitz used his personal knowledge and experience with the field of anthropology to support his conclusions. When discussing anthropology as a distinctive social science, Janowitz states that There are “two main elements that characterize Anthropology as a distinctive discipline” (139). The first is the anthropologist’s concern with a holistic objective, which he calls “configurational analysis” (149). The second deals with the manner in which anthropologist conduct their research. Several terms used to describe these methods are “prolonged,” “intensive,” and “direct.”

Under the next section, on anthropology as a converging discipline, anthropology is compared with economics, psychology, and sociology. Each of these comparisons is explained in detail, with Janowitz offering his assessments. Immediately following this, the objectivity of The Theory of Social Structure, by S. F. Nadel (1957), is commented upon. Janowitz states that Nadel’s work examines the concept of role and its usefulness in studying social structure and social organization.

It seems that Janowitz makes no real conclusions, but the author does express the need for further investigations of this topic.

LACEY CULPEPPER Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

McEwan, William J. Forms and Problems of Validation in Social Anthropology. Current Anthropology April, 1963 Vol.4(2):155-183

Social Anthropology is viewed as a subfield of cultural anthropology. It is generally distinguished in terms of relatively distinctive theoretical orientations and interests. Social anthropology is a science which strives for theoretical understanding. A problem that has risen is the manipulation of data for the purpose of evaluating empirically the validity of theoretical ideas. There must be empirical research to confirm theoretical ideas. There must be empirical research to confirm theoretical ideas. Research that is to confirm certain ideas must meet two conditions: 1. “presentation of data that show the relation specified by the proposition to be real and not an artifact of unreliable observation, fortuitous circumstances or similar misleading, or unstable occurrences”, 2.”presentation of data that establish the relation as determinate” (cite). Therefore three forms of data handling for the purpose of validation of data have been distinguished. Each of these forms has some limitations as well. The goal of all of these is to improve the understanding in social and not in the philosophy of science.

1.illustration or case analysis: *an analysis where a variety of data is presented in a heuristic manner *data here is presented and asserted to confirm, deny, or revise a hypothesis

2.comparison or type analysis: *data is involved in direct and non-quantitative analysis *consists in isolating a limited number of distinctive properties of a complex phenomenon of interest which are then used to identify sets of distinctive relations that are implied in the various types

3.testing or statistical analysis: *consists in applying a formal procedure to analysis of data *some form of statistics, draws its major inspiration from the lab science tradition

PRISCILLA GUIDO University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

McEwen, William J. Forms and Problems of Validation in Social Anthropology. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 155-183.

McEwen addresses the problem of validation in social anthropology. Social anthropology strives for theoretical understanding that requires the creation of a formal system with specified properties and rules to relate terms, which can be shown to fit some field of experience. Bias and the fear of theories are characteristic of social anthropological research. McEwen favors the use of empirical confirmation of research findings. Validation requires two conditions be met. The first condition is the presentation of data that show the relation specified by the proposal to be real and not a result of observation, circumstance, or other occurrence. The second is the establishment of relationships as determinant.

Three forms of data handling are discussed in the article. The first form is described as illustrative in which descriptions are offered. Case analysis presents a variety of data relevant to one or more ideas, but evaluation is impossible. The two conditions of validations are not present. Assertion is discussed in the context of simple assertion. Simple assertion presents data to establish validity of relations. Data is used illustratively as evidence. Hypotheses are discussed in both forms: as conclusion and as presumed tests of hypotheses. The most useful form of hypotheses is the concluding hypothesis. The concluding hypothesis is of considerable value in exploratory research. Deviant case analysis has a great heuristic value. Deviant behavior is selected to establish important relations. Functional analysis operates under the assumption of interdependence of systems. It appears to present a systematic method to develop explanations. However, functional statements are vague and indistinct. To establish validity, comparison and control must be established.

Typological analysis is the next form of data handling. It consists of creating comparisons and is not objective. Partial validation is achieved with typological analysis due to its comparative nature. It is employed as a descriptive method to organize data. Typing requires a degree of theoretical discrimination and also enables the anthropologist to complete a systematic exploration of conceptual relations. Limitations of this method include imprecision and lack of objectivity. The two limitations are interrelated and a consequence is the neglect of other possibilities.

The third form of data handling is testing and statistical analysis. The most important application of statistical methods in anthropology is the standardized testing of hypotheses. Secondary analysis uses previously collected data for testing and analysis. Problems with this include invalidity of data and a low degree of reliability. Another problem is the selection of units for comparison. Primary analysis uses original data. Data validity and reliability are problems here as well. Tests of significance determine the probability of differences in populations. Problems include the possibility of random events affecting relationships, test being used without measures of scale of differences, and timing of the application of the tests. Association and correlation are statistical methods to address the magnitude of relation. Anthropological data infrequently contain numerical properties that allow these methods to be used. Assessing determinateness establishes the degree of relation. Social anthropological research is lacking in its ability to sort complex sets of data in order to assess determinateness.

McEwen offers methods to improve validation possibilities. Data-collection methods should be improved by combining the two types of data currently collected: words about the observation of action and words about words concerning both action and other words. Advantages and uses for both types should be determined and used accordingly. A more flexible approach to data-collection, focuing on a specific problem is also needed. Research strategies should be improved by the combination of fieldwork and controlled setting environments for data-collection. Data analysis is dependent upon the creation of new tools for collection and analysis of data. The problem of validation could be solved with the use of new tools and methods. Mathematics should be looked to as a future tool for data analysis. The graph theory is also a new alternative in anthropological research and analysis.

Comments relative to this article were offered by Harold E. Driver, Irving Goldman, C.W.M. Hart, Harry B. Hawthorn, John J. Honigmann, A.J.F. Köbben, Edmund R. Leach, Robert A. Levine, Marion J. Levy Jr., Horace M. Miner, George P. Murdock, Bernard J. Siegel, Stanley H. Udy, Jr., and Monica Wilson.

A reply was given by William J. McEwen that focuses on what he sees as misinterpretation of the intention of his work. Theoretical ideas in research and research not related to validation addressed in the comments were not the intention of the review. McEwen also is not advocating mathematization of social anthropology. Addressing comments made by Hawthorn, he is in favor of more formal methods of analysis. He agrees with several commentators who state that theory in social anthropology is inadequate in posing questions. Commentators who found their interests neglected by the review are encouraged by the addition of information. Specific questions relating to the review are described as being both relevant and irrelevant. McEwen notes that the overall tone of commentary is sympathetic to his viewpoint, but offers little contribution to the problem of validation.

LAUREN MILLER Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)

Mead, Margaret. Socialization and Enculturation. Current Anthropology. April, 1963 Vol.4(2):184-188.

Margaret Mead discusses Melville Herskovits lack of knowledge regarding the difference between socialization and enculturation in her article titled “Socialization and Enculturation”. Mead mentions the major problem being that Herskovits has been known to hold detail in very high regards. In one of Herskovits publicly presented papers from 1949, he failed to correctly provide the details of child rearing and how culture affects children from the minute they are born until they grow into adults. Mead questions Herskovits because he usually is very keen on details. Culture is too often assumed to be painlessly learned and acquired when in reality it is hard and agonizing. The main solution to this problem is that one must remember the differences between these terms: socialization and enculturation. Enculturation is the beginning of the steps one must partake in to learn all the unique aspects of a culture, while socialization is the set of wide ranging requirements enforced upon people within their society. After defining these terms there is an apparent problem of Herskovits description of child rearing among various cultures. Problems with these words tend to arise when member of the anthropological field come across others in various fields, and this is why it is necessary to have a similar set of ideals on conceptual frames. It is found that when people of other fields rely on information from cultural anthropology they are faced with the concern that there is a point in which detail strips away the ideals of culture and that a generalized idea can be produced from a full set of complex details.

LAURA HAHNE University of San Diego (Alana Cordy-Collins)

Wax, Murray and Rosalie Wax The Notion of Magic. Current Anthropology 1963 Vol. 4: 495-518.

Social science has traditionally viewed magic through intellectual and moral frameworks. Magic has been compared unfavorably with Western social structures and most of the writing on the subject has been devoted to explaining the faults of magic. Lacking thus far has been an explanation of what magic is. The intellectual view of magic was popularized by the scholar Tylor, who wrote that magic was a pseudo-science. Frazer later also described magic as a pseudo-science, but he also suggested that the world view of magicians was similar to that of scientists in that they believed in “the uniformity of nature” (496). He differentiated between magic and religion by correlating religion with the supplication of deities, and relating magic to the belief that nature is subject to supernatural manipulation on the part of the magician. Durkheim held that religion and magic both were correlated with the sacred, but that magic was,

“ individualistic, divisive, and opposed to religion” (497), while religion bonded communities. Lowie criticized this interpretation on the grounds that in the case of many Native American religions there is no firm boundary between individual worship and group religion, and individual practices are not regarded as being immoral or counter to the views of the group.

Malinowski is another scholar who has added to the literature regarding magic. He is criticized here for claiming to agree with Frazer that magic is a psuedo-science, and then altering Frazer¹s argument and changing the meanings of the terms he used. Malinowski asserted that his subjects, the Trobriand Islanders, were reasonable people using magic in a practical way. The authors suggest that Malinowski relied on the dichotomy of nature vs. the supernatural, although he only infrequently mentions these terms. The authors further accuse Malinowski of giving the impression that he understood the magical viewpoint of his informants, when actually his work was being guided by his own cultural biases regarding magic. The authors propose that the asserted distinctions between magic and science do not exist in the minds of the primitive peoples using magic. They contend that these classifications are only conceived by Western scientists.

Wax and Wax suggest that the terms “primitive” and “magic” should be avoided because of the pejorative connotations they have developed. They further state that what has been termed “magic” should instead be called “magical world view.” This world view encompasses a vision of the world that is populated by beings rather than objects. They propose that a salient feature of this view is the concept of Power, or mana. Magical rites are then used to reestablish desirable relationships with Power. This world view should be seen as logical and practical within the societies that possess it. Michael Ames comments on this article by criticizing the Waxes’ interpretation of Durkheim, whom Ames states contrasted the sacred and the profane, not magic and religion. He also suggests that the Waxes are in accord with Durkheim¹s thoughts, although they do not realize it. Further, Durkheim thought that religion was a system of rituals and beliefs which unite people, which would encompass people individually practicing a religion that is common to their overall culture. Ames argues that Durkheim did not view magic as anti-social or corrupt, as he interprets the Waxes as supposing. He defines Durkheim¹s view of magic as being less sacred than religion and of expressing values that differ from that of the dominant cultural religion. Ames rejects the Waxes’ idea that common- sense terminology should be used in place of scientific categories. He also disputes that Durkheim polarized religion and magic, writing that, to Durkheim, people and things could be sometimes religious and sometimes magical, and sometimes both at once. David Bidney agrees with the Waxes that Malinowski¹s interpretation of the Trobriand Islanders as possessing a form of scientific thought was ethnocentric. However, he interprets their idea of the magical world view as being a combination of Tylor’s idea of animism and Marret’s view of mana. He further criticizes them for equating magic to a realm of belief. Bidney states instead that both religion and magic are practiced with an implicit world view and criticizes them for not explaining how a magical world view is separate from a religious world view. He suggests that the Waxes themselves are polarizing magic and religion. Ivar Paulson criticizes this paper on several counts. He approves of the Waxes¹ summary of the literature as it stands, but finds some points of weakness in their paper. He agrees with the Waxes that the rationalist viewpoint of Western scholars has confused the issue. He clarifies the difference between animatism, a belief in Power or mana, with animism, which is the belief in souls.

The Waxes respond to these comments by stating that they feel that ethnographic data has surpassed anthropological theory. They further state that they are not suggesting that social scientists stop trying to classify magic and religion. They defend their paper as being but a small piece of a larger theoretical contribution. They state that people who view the world as magical can be defined as primitive and that the world view of such primitives should be considered. They write that in cultures that use magic there is little need to distinguish magic from religion. They suggest that in magic-using societies the term “religion” should apply to group activities while “magic” should refer to their world views.

LEE ANN LOWE Mississippi State University (Janet Rafferty)