Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
HISTORICAL ESSAY
KEITH F. OTTERBEIN
Department of Anthropology
University at Buffalo
State University of New York
Buffalo, NY 14261
In this brief history of warfare research, I identify four major periods: Foundation Period, Classical Period, Golden Ag
and Recent Period. The myth of the peaceful savage arose in the Classical Period rather than in the later periods, as argued
by Lawrence Keeley. The myth has its origins in an early evolutionary approach as well as in cultural relativism. It contin-
ues to play a major role in warfare research with some anthropologists arguing for the peaceable nature of man, while oth
ers argue that man has engaged in warfare from the beginning of prehistory. [war, theories of warfare, history of warfar
research, myth ofpeaceful savage]
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
OTTERBEIN / RESEARCH ON WARFARE 795
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
796 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST * VOL. 101, No. 4 * DECEMBER 1999
(1956:3,
work up from hurling insults to hurling rocks at each other; 250-252, 256, 258, 261), W. W. Newcomb Jr
(1960:322-323,
this tournament-like war usually ends when the first enemy is 328), Morton Fried (1961:137, 140), and
killed. This kind of combat is a prearranged tryst, like Raoul
duels Naroll (1966:17).4 I can speak only for myself, but
under the European code duello. did not derive the notion from reading Tumey-High tha
I know of no tribe that fits this description. band and tribal level peoples were either peaceful or waged
war in a desultory way; what he said was that they did not
Keeley is correct that a "myth of the peaceful savage"
wage war efficiently, they had not passed "the military
developed, but he is incorrect when he attributes it to Harry
Hoijer, working for Quincy Wright, and to Harry horizon."
H. I knew of examples of bands and tribes that had,
yet I tested the notion and found that while there was no
Turney-High (1996:11). Hoijer did a cross-cultural study
clear "military horizon," his generalizations were essen-
of war in 1929, using a sample of over 650 peoples, which
was incorporated into Wright's massive A Study of War correct (Otterbein 1970:70-76, see table 17 on p. 74)
tially
([1942]1964:53-100, 412, 527-557). Hoijer showed Turney-High
that has recently been cited by Joan Vincent
(1990:254-255), John Keegan (1993:89-94), and
only 8% of hunters had no war (he used the technological
Lawrence
levels developed by Hobhouse, Wheeler, and Ginsberg); Keeley (1996:9-17), and has been credited by
Keeley
on the other hand, he showed that 75% of hunters had with being influential.
If the myth of the peaceful savage should not be attri-
"social war" ([1942]1964:556) defined as "mild warfare"
buted to Hoijer, as filtered through Wright, and Tumey-
where "no indication was found of fighting for definite
High, what is its "origin"? I believe the myth has deep
economic or political purposes" ([1942]1964:546).
roots in the Foundation Period, for it can be directly related
Slaughter of enemy could be an object of social war, but
to the evolutionary approach that was employed during
the object was more likely to be trophies and honors (what
that period.5 The myth of the peaceful savage is embedded
I have called a prestige goal of war, Otterbein 1970:63-67,
in the developmental typology. By definition an evolution-
146). Keeley further informs us that Hoijer "later co-
ary sequence must show change. If war was a monstrous
authored the most widely used anthropology textbook of
scourge in the twentieth century (remember the Classical
the 1950s and 1960s (Beals and Hoijer 1965 [1st ed.
Period follows World War I and encompasses World War
1953]). Thus anthropologists did not need to consult
II), it must have been less common and less lethal in the
Wright's massive book to be influenced by it (1996:203)."
past. Although the Classical Period is viewed as anti-
In their textbook, however, Beals and Hoijer do not discuss
evolutionary, the developmental framework persisted. A
war, but only political organization. Their first stage or
prime example comes from anti-evolutionist Robert Lowie,
"provisional category" of a three-stage sequence was "no
who, in The Origin of the State (1927), seeks the genesis of
true political organization, no organized warfare," not
statehood in the recognition of obligations to unrelated
peaceful hunters.2 The other two stages were "politically
members of the same community. This established territo-
organized as bands, tribes, or confederacies" and "con-
rial ties, which later came to take precedence over blood
quest states" ([1953]1959:502-503; 524). Thus it isties.
un-Examples were drawn from the Yurok of California
likely that any anthropologists learned the myth from and
thisthe Ifugao of Luzon.
textbook. Hoijer should not be blamed for the myth. Major figures in the field of anthropology writing on
Strangely, Wright gives William Lloyd Warner credit for
warfare subscribed to the evolutionary typology. Ruth
reading the chapter on primitive war (Wright [1942]1964:
Benedict prepared a paper in 1939 that describes the fight-
vii, 53-100), while not giving Hoijer credit for the ing
re-of many primitive peoples as being of the "non-lethal
search. If a textbook is to be blamed for the myth, a much
species of warfare," while modem warfare is described as
better candidate is Principles ofAnthropology, by Chapple
being of the "lethal variety." The paper was not published
and Coon (1942:628-635), which is not cited by Keeley.
until after Benedict's death, but I presume it was circu-
Although the Beals and Hoijer textbook was widely lated. In 1959 Margaret Mead selected it for inclusion in an
read, Turney-High seldom was (1949). The forewordanthology
to of Benedict's writings. Bronislaw Malinowski
the second edition by political scientist David Rapaport
in 1941 presented a developmental sequence in which the
tells us that Primitive War was rejected by Tumrney-High's
first three phases of war are nonserious; the third phase is
colleagues (Tumrney-High 1971:v). I think the bookarmedwas raids for sport (1941b). Malinowski argued that
largely unnoticed; anthropologists, like everyone else, do
warfare only slowly evolved as a mechanism of organized
not read what they are not interested in, and there wereforce
few for the pursuit of national policies. He described six
anthropologists interested in war. The picture of a Jivaro
types of armed contest: (1) fighting between group mem-
shrunken head on the dust jacket of the first edition might
bers-the prototype of criminal behavior, (2) fighting as a
have turned away many anthropologists. (The dust jacket juridical mechanism for the adjustment of differences, (3)
on the second edition has no picture.) The only anthropolo-
armed raids for sport, (4) warfare as political expression of
early nationalism, (5) military expeditions of organized
gists I know of who read and cited Tumey-High were my-
self, Melville Herskovits (1948:330, 344),3 Andrew Vayda
pillage, and (6) war as an instrument of national policy.
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
OTTERBEIN / RESEARCH ON WARFARE 797
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
798 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST * VOL. 101, No. 4 * DECEMBER 1999
data on warfare from the Foundation Period, the ethno- Table 1. Theories of the Causes and Effects of War.
graphic studies of the Classical Period formed the database
Turney-High drew upon, as well as that used later by cross-
Causes of War Effects of War Common Variable
cultural researchers who chose probability samples (see
(War as a Dependent (War as an
Golden Age, below). These studies should have led anthro-
Variable) Independent
pologists to reject the myth of the peaceful savage, but they
Variable)
did not. They became a smorgasbord from which the theo-
rists could pick to construct their developmental Innate
se- aggression On species Biological man
quences.
Frustration-aggression Ethnocentrism Hatred of enemy
The salient characteristic of the Classical Period was the
myth of the peaceful savage. People with no war or ritual
Diffusion Acculturation Spread of invention
war occupied the lower levels of developmental sequences. Physical Ecological Natural
The myth is a direct outgrowth of evolutionary thought that environment adaptation environment
became firmly rooted in the Foundation Period. Once the Goals of war Patterns and theme Values of men
myth sprouted in the Classical Period it was nurtured by Social structure On social Social groupings
cultural relativism. Well established, the myth came to in- organization
fluence research in the next two major periods.
Military preparedness Survival value Efficient militar
organization
Golden Age (c. 1960-c. 1980)
Cultural evolution Origin of the state Level of
Publications by anthropologists dealing with war dra- sociopolitical
matically increased in the 1960s. For this reason I have la- complexity
beled this decade and the next a Golden Age. Ferguson's
bar graph showing number of publications per year docu-
ments the increase (1988: facing i). Not until about 1980 me now that I moved progressively from genetic to cultural
do heights of the bars on the graph level off. Although the theories. As the 1970s proceeded, one theory on the list be-
number of publications drops for the years 1980-85, then came singularly important-ecological adaptation (Otter-
rises in 1986, I have interpreted this as a plateau. I am fit- bein 1977:695-696; Vayda 1976). Those anthropologists
ting a curve to the bar graph. Ferguson interprets this pe- who used an ecological approach viewed warfare as an im-
riod differently (personal communication, 1997): portant aspect of social life. Those who were critics of the
approach viewed warfare as dysfunctional, not functional
I see the later periods a little differently than might be inferred
from the graph in my bibliography. Rather than a rise, then a (Hallpike 1973). Sides were beginning to form; by the
plateau, I see a rise, fall, and rise again of interest. War studies 1990s they had crystallized (see Recent Period). The eco-
grew through the sixties and into the mid seventies. The late logical approach remains with us today in Robert Dentan's
seventies I see as declining interest. The ecological paradigm studies of peaceful peoples (1992).
had lost its head of steam. ... I think if my bibliography were Ethnographic classics of both warlike and peaceful peo-
extended, we would see another major increase in the late 80s. ples were produced. The warlike groups included the
The advent of "ethnic warfare" around 1992 prevented a simi- Yanomamo (Chagnon 1968), the Maring (Rapaport 1968),
lar fall off of interest with the end of the cold war, and as you
and the Dani (Heider 1970, 1979). The peaceful groups in-
note, created a new subdisciplinary focus.
cluded the Bushmen (Thomas 1958), the Pygmies (Turn-
Divale's bibliography ([1971]1973) and my review articles bull 1961), and the Semai (Dentan 1968). Some of anthro-
(Otterbein 1973, 1977) provide references, while Fer- pology's best known films were made about the lives of
guson's introduction (1984) and bibliography (1988) in- these peoples: e.g., The Feast (Yanomamo) (National
clude most of those references and additional ones from Audiovisual Center, 1970), Dead Birds (Dani) (Contem-
the next 15 years. porary Films/McGraw-Hill, 1964), and The Hunters
During this period, theories of the causes and effects of (Bushmen) (Contemporary Films, 1958). The warlike
war proliferated, classic ethnographies were produced, and groups struck at the heart of the myth of the peaceful sav-
cross-cultural studies, some using a developmental ap- age- here were tribal peoples who annihilated enemy vil-
proach similar to those used in the previous two periods, lages, while the peaceful groups seemed to substantiate the
flourished. In my first review article, I identified 16 theo- myth at least for hunter-gatherers and simple horticultural-
ries or approaches. Each pair of theories focused upon a ists. The peacefulness of these three groups has been ques-
common variable (see Table 1), which was either the cause tioned. The Bushmen once waged war, and they lost. It
of or the effect of war (Otterbein 1973:927, 1994b:165). was pointed out as early as 1962 by Elman Service that the
Although in that review I stated "there is no inherent logic Bushmen were a "defeated people" (p. 49). The Pygmies
to the order in which the pairs are presented," it appears to long ago lost their political independence. They are well
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
OTTERBEIN / RESEARCH ON WARFARE 799
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
800 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST * VOL. 101, No. 4 * DECEMBER 1999
The passage, however, proceeds and a totally different Recent Period (c. 1980-)
view of the warfare of tribal peoples emerges (Divale
[1971]1973:xxii). Output of publications on warfare in this period plateaus
(see Ferguson's bar graph, 1988: facing i), in spite of the
Groups that fought in pitched battles also conducted raids or increasing number of anthropologists. Two trends
ever
characterize
ambushes, and it was here that most of the killing occurred. In the research of recent years: first, theories
the past, many anthropologists viewed these pitched battlesconverged, with only 7 of the original 16 surviving; a sin-
and, noting the small number of casualties, concluded that gle model with variants emerged (Otterbein 1994b). Sec-
much or all of primitive warfare was a ritual or game. How-ond, research is now going in several, but related, direc-
ever, this perspective is now questioned, and it is suggested
tions: origin and seriousness of war, ethnic wars and
that such warfare was extremely effective, perhaps even
genocide, and studies of peaceful peoples. The theoretical
overeffective, in the sense that many cultural controls existed
model that has emerged contains three components; it can
whose primary aim was the regulation and limitation of war-
fare. be depicted as follows'0 (the original 7 theories are ordered
under their respective components):
Ambushes and lines form a two-component warfare pat- Material Causes-+ Efficient Causes-> Consequences
tern for bands and tribes, a pattern that probably was devel-
Physical Goals of war Effects on social
oped as early as the Paleolithic. Battles, in which warriors environment organization
confronted each other along a line, were a means of testing
Social
the strength of an adversary, while ambushes and raids on
structure Military Survival value
settlements were the means of killing large numbers of en-
preparedness
emy. The Tiwi appear to be an example (Otterbein 1997: Origin of the state
255-262). Ritual war, if it ever has occurred, would be
only one component of the basic warfare pattern. The writings of nine anthropologists on w
The myth appears later in an attack upon E. O. Wilson's shown to closely correspond to this paradig
Sociobiology: The New Synthesis (1975) by the Sociobiol- 1994b). They include Andrew Vayda, Keith
ogy Study Group of Science for the People (1976:184): William Divale, Marvin Harris, Napoleo
Robert Carneiro, Ronald Cohen, Raymon
"Primitive" warfare is rarely lethal to more than one or at Brian Ferguson. The paradigm has been use
most a few individuals in an episode of warfare, virtually studies as well as with comparative studies t
without significance genetically or demographically (Living- developmental approach.
stone 1968). Genocide was virtually unknown until state-or-
"This convergence in the anthropological stu
ganized societies appeared in history (as far as can be made
seems to stem from a natural process identifie
out from the archaeological and documentary records).
evolution by Hallpike (1987; Otterbein 19
At the time of the composition of the article there were 35
and for paleontology by Gould (1989:49);
there is a decrease in disparity of theories, stru
members of the organization; they are identified by one in-
or body plans followed by an increase in div
itial preceding the surname, hence it is not possible to as-
the few surviving theories, forms, or plan
certain whether there are anthropologists in the group.9 The
1994b: 172). This approach to the history of
Livingstone article cited contradicts the above description
of "primitive" war (1968:8-11); statement after statement gests that theories neither accumulate nor
other, but rather that a process occurs that inv
describes high casualty rates for the warfare of prehistoric
trition and combination (1994b:178). Howev
and nonliterate peoples. Wilson replies (1976:187):
publication of this report (1994), several of the
military activity and territorial expansion have been concomi- I thought had been set aside have made a co
tants throughout history and at all levels of social organization include innate aggression, diffusion-accultu
(Otterbein 1970), and they can hardly fail to have had signifi- zone theory), and cultural evolution (the ori
cant demographic and genetic consequences. These three approaches are discussed below.
sciences there seems to be no such thing as ex
Two salient characteristics of the Golden Age were: (1) The origin and seriousness of war has becom
A dramatic increase occurred in the number of publications terest once again as it had been in the Foundat
on warfare, both theoretical and ethnographic. Sixteen dif- sical Periods. Primatologists and archaeo
ferent theories were identified and over a half dozen classic joined in the inquiry. The killer ape/innate agg
ethnographies were written; and (2) sides were formed by ory, both in its professional and popular ma
those who believed that band and tribal peoples were war- had given way in the 1970s to the view that m
like and those who believed they were not. Ethnographic was a scavenger (Cartmill 1993:1-27; Ott
data were now available to support either position. 927-928), but recent observations of chimp
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
OTTERBEIN / RESEARCH ON WARFARE 801
McRandle,
attacking one another has resurrected the idea that the an- Robert O'Connell, primatologist Richard
cestor of man attacked his own kind. Wrangham and Wrangham,
Peter- and biologist Barbara Ehrenreich. Doves in-
clude anthropologists Elman Service, C. R. Hallpike,
son (1996) argue that since early man and the chimpanzees
Leslie Sponsel, and Thomas Gregor, political scientist
are similar, and chimps have changed little in five million
years (pp. 46-47), it can be inferred that behavior patterns
Richard Gabriel, and archaeologist Jonathan Haas. In spite
currently observed in chimpanzee groups were charac-of Keeley's allegations that Ferguson and Whitehead are
teristic of the common ancestor of both man and chimps.
believers in the myth of the peaceful savage, it would seem
Thus, according to Wrangham and Peterson, the origin of
more appropriate to view Sponsel and Gregor as the lead-
war lies neither in the Neolithic nor Paleolithic, but
ers five
of the Doves (see below). Their research is not re-
million years ago. Furthermore, if they are correct, viewed Paleo- by Keeley. My position is that the evidence from
lithic man engaged in warfare and so did hunter-gatherer prehistory supports neither of these ideal types (1997:252).
peoples in recent centuries. Another recent interest of anthropologists has been eth-
To attack the myth of the peaceful savage, or pacified nic wars and genocide. Not only can they be seen as result-
past, Keeley (1996) assembled archaeological findings ing that
from expanding states, they can be viewed as a result of
he believes show that warfare destructive of human life the breakup of the state. Since the end of the "cold war"
was a common occurrence in prehistory. Keeley also there have been an ever-increasing number of ethnic wars,
amassed a voluminous number of ethnographic cases of often accompanied by genocide (Nietschmenn 1987).
warring peoples, as had Turney-High (1949); he also uti- Carolyn Nordstrom and Antonius Robben have assembled
lized the frequency of warfare statistics available in cross-a number of articles on the topic (1995), while Mary Foster
cultural studies, primarily from Otterbein (The Evolution and Robert Rubenstein have been concerned with how
of War [ 1970]). Thus the evolution of war has resumed im- peace can be achieved (1986). Jack Eller describes how
portance in research on warfare in anthropology, with culture or tradition-remembered, interpreted, or in-
Keeley claiming victory over those who believe in thevented-is transformed into an ethnic identity and then
myth of the peaceful savage. Unanticipated support for the how ethnicity is transformed into conflict (1999).
evolutionary approach has come from primatology. Studies of peaceful societies have recently flourished
Wrangham's theory, however, has been challenged by(Gregor 1996; Howell and Willis 1989; Sponsel and Gre-
Robert Sussman, for both its logic and the data used to sup- gor 1994,). Librarian Bruce Bonta (1993) has compiled an
port it (1999). annotated bibliography of 47 peaceful peoples. Thomas
The above approach contrasts with another view that Gregor (1994:242-243) acknowledges that peaceful socie-
seeks to understand the origin and seriousness of war by ties are rare but believes they are worth studying for the
employing a world-systems approach (Wolf 1982), guidance or they can give as to how peace might be achieved.
what can be called tribal zone theory (Ferguson and White- Robert Dentan (1994) points out that peaceful societies
head 1992). This approach is strongly linked to the diffu- usually fit one of two social types: they are either enclaved
sion-acculturation or culture contact approach of the Clas-societies, such as the Amish, or very small-scale societies,
sical Period. War in tribal zones is generated by expandingmany of them hunter-gatherers, such as the Semai. Peoples
states. Three categories of war can occur: (1) Wars of resis-like the Semai have adapted to slave raids by their ability to
tance and rebellion, (2) Ethnic soldiering, and (3) Inter- disperse and regroup. In their "geographic refuge" they be-
necine warfare. This approach challenges the notion that come nonviolent and develop values of peaceability (Den-
war occurred early in man's development by arguing that tan 1992:215-220). More recently Thomas Gregor has
the presumed pristine and violent warfare of such cultures pulled together the findings of himself, Sponsel, and others
as the Yanomami is caused by state expansion (Ferguson into A Natural History of Peace (1996).
1995). In other words, the issue with us is whether ob- The Recent Period has two salient characteristics. (1) A
served native warfare has an indigenous development or issingle theoretical model, which focuses upon both causes
the result of culture contact.'2 and consequences of war, characterized the works of nu-
Lawrence Keeley considers tribal zone theorists Brian merous researchers working on the Anthropology of War.
Ferguson and Neil Whitehead to be the chief proponents of (2) A controversy has developed between those who be-
the myth of the peaceful savage (1996:20-21, 203, 205), lieve that it is man's nature to be warlike and those who be-
while Ferguson vigorously denies the charge (1997:424). lieve his nature is to be peaceable. One side sees war as
The bifurcation that has arisen among those who study the part of human nature, the other as the result of state organi-
origin and seriousness of war had led me to distinguish two zation, whether the state is expanding, warring with other
groups of scholars-Hawks and Doves (1997:251-252, states, or dissolving into warring ethnic groups.
266-270). Keeley heads the Hawks and Ferguson theOver the past 150 years the ethnographic database on
Doves. Hawks include anthropologist Robert Carneiro,warfare has increased. It includes many excellent descrip-
military historians Arther Ferrill, John Keegan, James tions of warring peoples and a few descriptions of peaceful
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
802 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST * VOL. 101, No. 4 * DECEMBER 1999
peoples. A developmental sequence using stages of war, uprising in Medieval/Renaissance Europe" (personal commu-
what I call the evolution of war or cultural evolution nication,
ap- 1997). Lawrence Keeley placed the origin of the
proach, has been the dominant theoretical perspective myth in the writings of Rousseau (1996:5-8).
6. I tested the notion that warfare between tribal peoples is
throughout much of this time. The myth of the peaceful
often arranged mutually and found it lacked support. In a
savage grew out of this evolutionary thought and was nur-
cross-cultural study I found that only 4 out of 28 uncentralized
tured by cultural relativism. Contrary to Lawrence
political systems initiated war by either announcement or mu-
Keeley's contention that the myth arose after 1960, this
tual arrangement; the other 24 used surprise (Otterbein
history of research on warfare has shown that the myth de-
1970:33).
veloped decades earlier. His replacement myth that nonlit- 7. Military historian Doyne Dawson, who cites other pub-
erate peoples were bellicose has set up a polarization lications
be- of Divale, emphasizes the ritualization of primitive
tween Hawks and Doves. war in The Origins of Western Warfare (1996:13-24). He
From the Classical Period onward numerous other theo- readily accepts the myth of the peaceful savage. His first foot-
retical approaches have been tried, but none gathered the note approvingly cites Wright, Malinowski, and Turney-High.
number of adherents who have used an evolutionary ap-
8. As indicated by the ellipses, Divale's description is
longer than this; Keegan shortened the original statement to a
proach. However, for both case and comparative studies a
more modest degree.
paradigm that examines causes (material and efficient) and
9. The members of the Sociobiology Study Group of Sci-
consequences has come to be employed. This paradigm ence for the People listed are: L. Allen, B. Beckwith, J. Beck-
has shown itself to be useful in studying the conditions un- with, S. Chorover, D. Culver, N. Daniels, E. Dorfman, M.
der which war and other forms of violence occur. Some Duncan, E. Engelman, R. Fitten, K. Fuda, S. Gould, C. Gross,
conditions lead to war, some do not. I see great variation in
R. Hubbard, J. Hunt, H. Inouye, M. Kotelchuck, B. Lange, A.
Leeds, R. Levins, R. Lewontin, E. Loechler, B. Ludwig, C.
the nature and frequency of war. It is this variation and the
Madansky, L. Miller, R. Morales, S. Motheral, K. Muzal, N.
reasons for it that researchers should be investigating
Ostrom, R. Pyeritz, A. Reingold, M. Rosenthal, M. Mersky,
(Dentan and Otterbein 1996; Otterbein 1987, 1988a,
M. Wilson, and H. Schreier.
1991a, 1991b, 1993, 1997, in press).
10. James McRandle informs us that this paradigm is
standard in the study of military history (1994:ix):
Notes
My choice of history as a major in college was much influ-
Acknowledgments. I am indebted to my wife, Charlotte enced by these experiences [service in World War II]; I
Swanson Otterbein, for her careful editing of this paper. My learned to analyze such things as immediate and underlying
colleague, Robert Knox Dentan, has made both content and causes of particular conflicts, the conduct of the campaigns,
editorial suggestions. R. Brian Ferguson, Andrew P. Vayda, and the changes occasioned by the outcome of the various
and my colleagues Saurnas Milisauskas and Timothy Pauketat wars.
have read the manuscript and made helpful suggestions. Four
Allan Millett has noted that the traditional focus of academic
anonymous reviewers likewise provided useful comments.
military historians was on the three "Cs"-the causes, conduct,
1. Recently in a cross-cultural study I have found some of
and consequences of warfare (1992:15).
the conclusions of Hobhouse, Wheeler, and Ginsberg to be in-
11. In 1988 (p. iii) Ferguson could write that "in recent
correct (Otterbein in press). While 93% of the societies in my
years there has been relatively little attention to the signifi-
sample killed captured enemy warriors, only 26% killed cance for war of sociocultural evolution. This was once the
women and children. Contrary to Hobhouse, Wheeler, and
major focus of anthropological theory in war, and its great im-
Ginsberg, uncentralized political systems are unlikely to kill
portance has been demonstrated by Otterbein 1985 (Evolution
women and children. Indeed, the higher the level of political of War). "
complexity, the more likely that women and children will be
12. For a detailed analysis of the tribal zone approach see
killed-from 15% to 44%.
my article "Ethnic Soldiers .. ." in Reviews in Anthropology
2. R. Lauriston Sharp at this time (1958) described the(1994a).
Yir
Yoront of Australia in these terms when he called them "a
people without politics." Yet his account mentions "fighting
References Cited
spears" being traded (p. 6) and "a spear just thrown in a gen-
eral fight" (p. 5). Sounds like war! Beals, Ralph L., and Harry Hoijer
3. Herskovits cites a 1942 version, which Turney-High de- [1953]1959 An Introduction to Anthropology. 2nd edition.
scribes as a portion of the 1949 work (1949:xiv). New York: The Macmillan Company.
4. Naroll's own copy of Turney-High's Primitive Warfare, Benedict, Ruth
now in the library of the Anthropology Department at the Uni- 1934 Patterns of Culture. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
versity at Buffalo, has been marked in red pen as far as page 1959 The Natural History of War. In An Anthropologist at
31, where a 4 x 6 white page marker lies. Work. M. Mead, ed. Pp. 369-382. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
5. Robert Dentan "suspects that its wider origin is in theBonta, Bruce
peasant Golden Age myth, embodied in a fraudulent docu- 1993 Peaceful Peoples: An Annotated Bibliography. Me-
ment, 'The Epistle of Clement,' and activated in every peasant tuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press.
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
OTTERBEIN / RESEARCH ON WARFARE 803
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
804 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST * VOL. 101, No. 4 * DECEMBER 1999
Hallpike, C. R. ters, Marc Milner, and J. Brent Wilson, eds. Pp. 3-21. West-
1973 Functionalist Interpretations of Primitive Warfare. Man port, CT: Prager.
8:451-470. Mishkin, Bernard
1987 The Principles of Social Evolution. New York: Claren-1940 Rank and Warfare among the Plains Indians. American
don/Oxford University Press. Ethnological Society monograph no. 3.
Hart, C. W. M., and Arnold R. Pilling Naroll, Raoul
1960 The Tiwi of North Australia. New York: Holt, Rinehart1966 Does Military Deterrence Deter? Trans-Action 3(2):
and Winston. 14-20.
1979 The Tiwi of North Australia: Fieldwork Edition. New
Newcomb, William W., Jr.
York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
1960 Toward an Understanding of War. In Essays in the Sci-
Hart, C. W. M., Arnold R. Pilling, and Jane C. Goodale
ence of Culture. G. Dole and R. Carneiro, eds. Pp. 317-335.
1988 The Tiwi of North Australia. 3rd edition. New York:
New York: Crowell.
Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Nietschmann, Bernard
Heider, Karl
1987 Militarization and Indigenous Peoples, Introduction:
1970 The Dugum Dani: A Papuan Culture in the Highlands of
The Third World War. Cultural Survival Quarterly 11(3):
West New Guinea. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropol-
1-14
ogy No. 49. New York: Wenner-Gren Foundation.
Nordstrom, Carolyn, and Antonius Robben, eds.
1979 Grand Valley Dani: Peaceful Warriors. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston. 1995 Fieldwork under Fire: Contemporary Studies of Vio-
Herskovits, Melville J. lence and Survival. Berkeley: University of California Press.
O'Connell, Robert L.
1948 Man and His Works: The Science of Cultural Anthropol-
1995 Ride of the Second Horseman: The Birth and Death of
ogy. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Hobhouse, L. T., G. C. Wheeler, and M. Ginsberg War. New York: Oxford University Press.
1915 The Material Culture and Social Institutions of the Sim- Otterbein, Keith F.
pler Peoples. London: Chapman and Hall. 1970 The Evolution of War: A Cross-Cultural Study. New
Howell, Signe, and Roy Willis, eds. Haven, CT: Human Relations Area Files Press.
1989 Societies at Peace: Anthropological Perspectives. Lon- 1973 The Anthropology of War. In Handbook of Social and
don: Routledge. Cultural Anthropology. John J. Honigmann, ed. Pp. 923-958.
Jablow, Joseph New York: Rand McNally and Co.
1951 The Cheyenne in Plains Indian Trade Relations 1977 Warfare: A Hitherto Unrecognized Critical Variable.
1795-1840. American Ethnological Society monograph no. American Behavioral Scientist 20:693-710.
19.
1985 Evolution of War: A Cross-Cultural Study. 2nd edition.
Keegan, John New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
1993 A History of Warfare. New York: Knopf. 1987 Comment. Current Anthropology 28:484-485
Keeley, Lawrence H. 1988a Comment. Current Anthropology 29:633-636.
1996 War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Sav- 1988b Review of Principles of Social Evolution. American
age. New York: Oxford University Press.
Anthropologist 90:444-445
Lewis, Oscar
1991a Comment. Current Anthropology 32:245-247.
1942 The Effects of White Contact upon Blackfoot Culture,
1991b Comment. Current Anthropology 32:413-414.
with Special Reference to the Role of the Fur Trade. American
1993 Comment. Current Anthropology 34:244.
Ethnological Society monograph no. 6. 1994a Ethnic Soldiers, Messiahs, and Cockalorums. Reviews
Livingstone, Frank B.
in Anthropology 23:213-225.
1968 The Effects of Warfare on the Biology of the Human
1994b Feuding and Warfare: Selected Works of Keith F. Ot-
Species. In War: The Anthropology of Armed Conflict and
terbein. Langhorne, PA: Gordon and Breach.
Aggression. M. Fried, M. Harris, and R. Murphy, eds. Pp.
1997 The Origins of War. Critical Review 11:251-277.
3-15. Garden City, NJ: Natural History Press.
Lowie, Robert H. In press The Killing of Captured Enemies: A Cross-Cultural
1927 The Origin of the State. New York: Russel and Russel. Study. Current Anthropology 41.
Malinowski, Bronislaw Pilling, Arnold R.
1968 Discussion: Predation and Warfare. In Man the Hunter.
1941a War-Past, Present, and Future. In War as a Social In-
stitution: The Historian's Perspective. J. Clarkson and T. Co- R. Lee and I. Devore, eds. P. 158. Chicago: Aldine Atherton.
chran, eds. Pp. 20-30. New York: Columbia University Press. Pitt-Rivers, A. Lane-Fox
194 lb An Anthropological Analysis of War. American Jour- 1906 The Evolution of Culture and Other Essays. Oxford:
Clarendon.
nal of Sociology 46:521-550.
McRandle, James H. Rapaport, Roy A.
1994 The Antique Drums of War. College Station: Texas A & 1968 Pigs for the Ancestors: Ritual in the Ecology of a New
M University Press. Guinea People. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Millett, Allan R. Rohner, Ronald P., Billie R. DeWalt, and Robert C. Ness
1992 American Military History: Clio and Mars as "Pards."In 1973 Ethnographer Bias in Cross-Cultural Research: An Em-
Military History and the Military Profession. David A. Char- pirical Study. Behavior Science Notes 4:275-317.
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
OTTERBEIN / RESEARCH ON WARFARE 805
Thomas, Elizabeth M.
Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland
1951 Notes and Queries on Anthropology. London: Rout- 1958 The Harmless People. New York: Random House, In
ledge and Kegan Paul Ltd. Turnbull, Colin M.
Secoy, Frank R. 1961 The Forest People. New York: Simon and Schuster,
Turney-High,
1953 Changing Military Patterns on the Great Plains. Ameri- Harry H.
can Ethnological Society monograph no. 21. 1949 Primitive War: Its Practice and Concepts. Columb
Service, Elman R. University of South Carolina Press.
1962 Primitive Social Organization: An Evolutionary 1971
Per- Primitive War: Its Practice and Concepts. 2nd edit
spective. New York: Random House. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
Sharp, R. Lauriston Tylor, Edward B.
1958 People without Politics: The Australian Yir Yoront.
1888InOn a Method of Investigating the Development of I
Systems of Political Control and Bureaucracy in Human tutions:
So- Applied to Laws of Marriage and Descent. Journa
cieties: Proceedings of the 1958 Annual Spring Meeting of the
the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and
American Ethnological Society. Verne F. Ray, ed., Pp.land
1-8.18:245-270.
Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Vayda, Andrew
Sociobiology Study Group of Science for the People 1956 Maori Warfare. Ph.D. Dissertation, Columbia Univer-
1976 Sociobiology-Another Biological Determinism. Bio-
sity.
science 26(3): 182, 184-186.
1976 War in Ecological Perspective. New York: Plenum.
Sponsel, Leslie E. Venbrux, Eric
1996 The Natural History of Peace: A Positive View 1995
of Hu-
A Death in the Tiwi Islands: Conflict, Ritual and Social
man Nature and Its Potential. In A Natural History of Peace.
Life in an Austrailian Aboriginal Community. Cambridge:
Thomas Gregor, ed. Pp. 95-128. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt
Cambridge University Press.
University Press.
Vincent, Joan
1998 Yanomami: An Arena of Conflict and Aggression in the
1990 Anthropology and Politics: Visions, Traditions, and
Amazon. Aggressive Behavior 24:97-122.
Trends. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Sponsel, Leslie E., and Thomas Gregor, eds.
White, Leslie A.
1994 The Anthropology of Peace and Nonviolence. Boulder,
1949 The Science of Culture. New York: Grove Press.
CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Wilson, Edward O.
Stocking, George W., Jr.
1975 Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, MA:
1976 Ideas and Institutions in American Anthropology:
Harvard University Press.
Thoughts Toward a History of the Interwar Years. In Selected
1976 Academic Vigilantism and the Political Significance of
Papers from the American Anthropologist, 1921-1945.
George W. Stocking, Jr., ed. Pp. 1-50. Washington, Sociobiology.
DC: BioScience 26(3): 183,187-190.
American Anthropological Association. Wolf, Eric R.
Stocking, George W., Jr., ed. 1982 Europe and the People Without History. Berkeley: Uni-
versity of California Press.
1989 Romantic Motives: Essays on Anthropological Sensi-
bility. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. Wrangham, Richard W., and Dale Peterson
Sussman, Robert W. 1996 Demonic Males: Apes and the Origins of Human Vio-
1999 The Myth of Man the Hunter/Man the Killer andlence. the Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Evolution of Human Morality. In The Biological BasisWright,
of Hu-Quincey
man Behavior. Robert W. Sussman, ed. Pp. 121-129. [1942]1964
Saddle A Study of War. Chicago: University of Chicago
River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Press.
This content downloaded from 105.152.81.54 on Fri, 25 Aug 2017 16:41:30 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms