Table of Contents

Main Points

founding theory of cultural anth.

ALSO KNOWN AS: social evolutionism

development theory

Example Subheading

Example text...

• Example bullet 1
• Example bullet 2
• Example bullet 3

Key Figures

Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-1881)-          

Often cited as the father of the ethnographical approach to anthropology, Lewis Henry Morgan contributed greatly to the methodology of Evolutionism in the 19^th century, providing Edward Burnett Tyler with the foundation for the unilinear path towards full or complete cultural significance. Considered the first real ethnographical text, Morgan’s 1851 text The League of the Iroquois laid the foundation for anthropological documentation to the current day. His text documents the customs, rituals, and interactions of the Iroquois, and he marks each significant tradition along the line conceived in order to track the tribes progress along a “socio-evolutionary scale”*. His text Ancient Society (1877) depicts his conceptualization of a universal scale, describing the ascent from savagery to civilization, and citing instances and examples in which his theories are demonstrated.

Other significant texts include his 1870 analysis of familial and societal interactions entitled Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family.

Christian Jurgensen Thomsen (1788-1865)-

Danish archeologist Christian Jurgensen Thomsen, known primarily for his development of the “Three Age System” (consisting of a Stone Age, a Bronze Age, and an Iron Age) is also said to have endorsed the systematic association of cultures along a designated scale. As head of Antiquarian Collections at the Copenhagen museum, his work required a classifications system, and the movement toward cultural evolutionism seemed natural to a man used to categorizing, labeling, and scaling the artifacts of ancient societies.

Thomsen worked for the Danish Royal Commission for the Preservation and Collection of Antiquities in 1816. His works include A Guide to Northern Antiquities published in 1847.

Key Texts

Perhaps the most influential text regarding Cultural Evolutionary theory comes from Lewis Henry Morgan’s Ancient Society, published in _____. [citation needed]. Morgan’s research was an attempt to understand the perceived differences in development across various cultures. Measured mostly by technical developments observed in different cultures, Morgan attempted to cross-culturally compare surveyed groups, aligning them as “Savage”, “Barbarian”, or “Civilized.” Jerry D. Moore, author of An Introduction to Anthropological Theories and Theorists, notes that Morgan’s purpose was to clarify that “Savagery in one culture, barbarism in another, and civilization in a third were not the result of different races being genetically condemned to backwardness or development; they were simply societies perched at different stages on a common progression of cultural evolution.” [citation needed] Morgan summarizes by saying, “The latest investigations respecting the early condition of the human race are tending to the conclusion that mankind commenced their career at the bottom of the scale and worked their way up from savagery to civilization through the slow accumulations of experimental knowledge.” [citation needed].

Edward Burnett Tylor, a contemporary of Morgan, noted his own theory of the evolutionary process of religion in his book, Primitive Culture, first published in 1871. [citation needed.]

     Edward Tylor’s Primitive Culture is one of the most important texts regarding Cultural Evolution. Through his research he attempts to explain the past and predict the future by classifying and comparing groups of people. “The phenomena of culture can be classified and staged in an order of revolution” (citation needed). Tylor makes broad generalizations about culture and quotes Dr. Johnson in his work saying, “Any one set of savages is like the other” (citation needed). Tylor recognized man as one group but claimed that all men were in different grades of civilization, which could be recognized systematically and concretely. He states also that trusting isolated statements from ethnographers was dangerous and that one needed corresponding accounts from around the world (citation needed). The bulk of his work focuses on huge generalizations. Tylor claims that even though there is great distance between groups of “savages,” they all have the same qualities. His method for studying culture relies on not focusing on individuals but rather studying the special habits of a group and then studying the prevalence of those habits. By studying those habits and their frequency, he proposes that one can place groups of people into the different levels of culture. Ways of defining culture proposed in his book are definite and systematic. He states, “The principal criteria of classification are the absence or presence, high or low development, of the industrial arts, especially metal-working, manufacture of implements and vessels, agriculture, architecture, the extent of scientific knowledge, the definiteness of moral principles, the condition of religious belief and ceremony, the degree of social and political organization, and so forth” (citation needed).

            Tylor states that one of the most important parts of studying culture was to study the use of weapons of tools within a group. The material things in the group’s life were the most important evidence to represent their culture. He states that one must “treat actions or objects like species” (citation needed).

            Origin and language section…

            Art section…

            In this text, religion is an important piece to defining one’s culture. Tylor explains how in savage cultures, the development of religion is extremely ignorant.

            Political Organization section….

Critiques

Anthropology is supposed to be the study of culture across time and space, not in one time or space. Therefore pinning people to a static societal expectation?... is fallacious. Peoples lives are still unfolding, so there aren’t necessarily obvious answers, definitions, patterns to their lives. Each culture, subculture, etc. unfolds in discreet ways.

Ethnographers arelooking at how different societies respond to different challenges; not necessarily looking for universals, common ground, but looking at diversity... Morgan and Tylor predated applied anthropology, and did not understand the intense diversity of the world, that it cannot be held to the same standard. Further, this standard, of superior western civilization...was perpetuated by these armchair anthropologists who had not immersed themselves in the cultures they were claiming knowledge of. Though they did their share of research, the information was not firsthand or personal, which are now important aspects of the study and research of anthropology.

Theory: an explanatory framework that helps us understand why something exists; what we use to explain, not necessarily provable; open ended; looking at patterns, answers, relationships; don’t use control groups

Ethnography: account of a particular community, society, or culture

Cultures do elvove overtime, and differ depending on space, but these are not the only quota. Human diversity is not linear, nor can all humans be placed in the same development standards. Although it helps for the academic field, applied anthropologists know that it is not always best to categorize cultures, and even if you can, most cannot categorize distinctively.

The theory is ethnocentric, stating that all cultures have a capacity to be on same level as Western civ. Others are primitive, not yet at the level of western civ. Line goes towards becoming christian

The theory further allowed for cultural hegemony of the West over the rest in the forms of colonization and ongoing impreliasm. It is still applicable today, in our globalized world, where the West holds priority and influence over the rest f the world, particularly the third world. Anti-globalizers argue...

KEY FIGURES IN CRITIQUE 

Armchair anthro: reading books from missionaries, colonial officials, travelers, traders

discriminatory/unequal, makes presumptions abt where cultures are supposed to go, assigning ranks and values to them.

Ethnocentric- priviledged the west as superior

Ahistorical

Based on very broad/general comparison, not getting to detail of cultural existence

Holds Western Civ as a standard for all others,

For Morgan the question of how societies developed from one evolutionary level to the next was nothing if not theoretical

his typology of developmental stages aimed at nothing less than the explanation of boh human history and human diversity

the distinction between "primitive" and "modern" societies was a theoretically argued one

mold of ahistorical, rural, tribe study

studying  "modernizing" peoples"who all wear pants" could hardly be central; to the more prestigeous arena of antrho theory145-6

definiteively refuted in early 20thC by Boas

emphasis on sorting societies according to their level of evolutionary development

from who's pt of view can one society be seen as higher than another

emperically flawed

ethnocentric 144

SourceL

Edelman, Marc. Haugerud, Angelique. The Anthropology of Development and Globalization. From Classical Political Economy to Contemporary Neoliberalism. Blackwell: Oxford, 2008.

heres a link to a cartoon deal http://www.newyorker.com/images/2008/09/08/cartoons/080908_cartoon_4_a13481_p465.gif

couldn't really figure out how to make it show up as the pic

You can see how this theory was created because of the biased/limited resources available to these authors. However, what is most important about this branch of anth, is how it served as a launch-pad for other more accurate studies of culture...encouraged people to go check out these cultures, just by mentioning them and breeding curiosity?

We cant blame these theorists for globalization, though it is important to recognize the elitist attitude that is certainly derived from a western superiority complex, and definitely circulates and continues these ideals and attitudes for future americans both scholarly and generally.