85

lme of the limitations of the comparative method

4. The Limitations of the

ble to account for all the types of culture by claimin
~ similar because of the similarity of the human minl Comparative Method of
ry of similar traits in different societies is not as impor.
:omparative school would have it. Anthropologyl
s may well have developed for very different reasons in
tures.

lat cultural differences are minute is groundless-it is

Modern anthropology has discovered the fact that human society
differences that are of major ethnographic importance.

has grown and developed everywhere in such a manner that its forms, its opin­
ions and its actions have many fundamental traits in common. This momen­
) replace the comparative method with a method that

ling points:
toUS discovery implies that laws exist which govern the development of society;
that they are applicable to our society as well as to those of past times and of
distant lands; that their knowledge will be a means of understanding the causes
ve to be studied in detail and as a part of the cultural

furthering and retarding civilization; and that, guided by this knowledge, we

ltion of a custom within neighboring cultures should
may hope to govern our actions so that the greatest benefit to mankind will
yzed.
accrue from them. Since this discovery has been clearly formulated, anthropol­
ogy has begun to receive that liberal share of public interest which was withheld
o Boas this method would enable the student (1) to
from it as long as it was believed that it could do no more than record the curi­
lmental factors that influenced a culture, (2) to clarify
ous customs and beliefs of strange peoples; or, at best, trace their relationships,
aspects that shape the culture, and (3) to clarify the his­
and thus elucidate the early migrations of the races of man and the affinities
levelopment of a custom.
of peoples.
Isly, is a call for the inductive method in anthropology.
While early investigators concentrated their attention upon this
the first task of anthropology was to study individual
purely historic2.l problem, the tide has now completely turned, so that there are
comparative generalizations could come only on the even anthropologists who declare that such investigations belong to the
ted data. His importance within the discipline is pre­
historian, and that anthropological studies must be confined to researches on
hat anthropology should become a discipline using the
the laws that govern the growth of society.
of induction. In an age when the scientific method was
It in intellectual circles, it is not surprising that Boas's A radical change of method has accompanied this change of views.
be the right alternative to the comparative method, While formerly identities or similarities of culture were considered incon­
;cultural data had been carried to excess. trovertible proof of historical connection, or even of common origin, the new
school declines to consider them as such, but interprets them as results of the
u~iform working of the human mind. The most pronounced adherent of this
t ew in our country is Dr. D. G. Brinton, in Germany the majority of the fol­
~wers of Bastian, who in this respect go much farther than Bastian himself.
hthers , while not denying the occurrence of historical connections, regard
t em. as significant in results and in theoretical importance as compared to the
~orktng of the uniform laws governing the human mind. This is the view of
far the greater number of living anthropologists.
. This modern view is founded on the observation that the same eth­
n~lphen?mena occur among t h
th e most' . says, on
diverse peoples, or, as Bastam
e appallmg monotony of the fundamental ideas of mankind all over the

~ . ~-- ._._---­
~'9'nnted f
field Ill' rom S'
Clence 4, No. 103 (December 18, 1896), courtsey of Charles C Thomas, Publishers, Spring-
I lnOIS
OU 1 Idll" UUCl~
globe. The metaphysical notions of man may be reduced to a few types which
are of universal distribution; the same is the case in regard to the forms of soci­
ety, laws and inventions. Furthermore, the most intricate and apparently illogi­
cal ideas and the most curious and complex customs appear among a few tribes
here and there in such a manner that the assumption of a common historical
origin is excluded. When studying the culture of anyone tribe, more or less
close analoga of single traits of such a culture may be found among a great diver­
sity of peoples. Instances of such analoga have been collected to a vast extent
by Tylor, Spencer, Bastian, Andree, Post and many others, so that it is not
necessary to give here any detailed proof of this fact. The idea of a future life
the one underlying shamanism; inventions such as fire and the bow; certai~
elementary features of grammatical structure-these will suggest the classes of
phenomena to which I refer. It follows from these observations that when we
find an analogon of single traits of culture among distant peoples, the presump­
tion is not that there has been a common historical source, but that they have
arisen independently.
But the discovery of these universal ideas is only the beginning of
the work of the anthropologist. Scientific inquiry must answer two questions
in regard to them: First, what is their origin? and second, how do they assert
themselves in various cultures?
The second question is the easier one to answer. The ideas do not
exist everywhere in identical form, but they vary. Sufficient material has been
accumulated to show that the causes of these variations are either external, that
is founded in environment-taking the term environment in its widest sense­
or internal, that is founded on psychological conditions. The influence of
external and internal factors upon elementary ideas embodies one group oflaws
governing the growth of culture. Therefore, our endeavors must be directed to
showing how such factors modify elementary ideas.
The first method that suggests itself and which has been generally
adopted by modern anthropologists is to isolate and classify causes by grouping
the variants of certain ethnological phenomena according to external condi­
tions under which the people live, among whom they are found, or to internal
causes which influence their minds; or inversely, by grouping these variants
according to their similarities. Then the correlated conditions of life may be
found.
By this method we begin to recognize even now with imperfect
knowledge of the facts what causes may have been at work in shaping the cul­
ture of mankind. Friedrich Ratzel and W. ]. McGee have investigated the
influence of geographical environment on a broader basis of facts than Ritter
and Guyot were able to do at their time. Sociologists have made important
studies on the effects of the density of population and of other simple social
causes. Thus the influence of external factors upon the growth of society is
becoming clearer.
The effects of psychical factors are also being studied in the same
manner. Stoll has tried to isolate the phenomena of suggestion and of hyp­
notism and to study the effects of their presence in the cultures of various peo­
ples. Inquiries into the mutual relations of tribes and peoples begin to show that
certain cultural elements are easily assimilatl
the time-worn phrases of the imposition of c
people upon one of lower culture that has b
more thorough views on the subject of excha
all these investigations we are using sound, ir
late the causes of observed phenomena.
The other question in regard to tn
their origin, is much more difficult to treat. tv
discover the causes which have led to the forn
iron necessity wherever man lives:' This is the
pology and we may expect that it will baffle
come. Bastian denies that it is possible to
inventions, ideas, customs and beliefs which:
may be indigenous, they may be imported, th
of sources, but they are there. The human n
them spontaneously or accepts them whenevE
much misunderstood elementary idea of Bas
To a certain extent the clear enu
gives us the psychological reason for its exist
the land of the shadows is so often placed in 1
localize it at the place where the sun and the
that primitive man considers animals as gift
shows that the analogy between many of the
qualities has led to the generalization that
human. In other cases the causes are not so sel
all languages distinguish between the self, the
spoken of, and why most languages do not ca
tion in the plural is difficult to answer. The p
tently requires that in the plural there should
expressing the self and the person addressed ar
the person spoken of, which distinction is .
guages only. The lesser liability to misundersn
phenomenon partly but hardly adequately. St
cal basis in other cases, for instance, in that 0
Proof of the difficulty of this problem is the n
been invented to explain it in all its varied
In treating this, the most difficu
point of view is taken that if an ethnological,
pendently in a number of places its develo]
where; or, expressed in a different form, that tI
are always due to the same causes. This lead
that the sameness of ethnological phenomen
t~at the human mind obeys the same laws
different historical developments could lead 1
generalization would not be tenable. Their
entirely different problem, namely, how it is
So often lead to the same results. It must, tht

e reduced to a few types which
e in regard to the forms of soci_
intricate and apparently illogi_
toms appear among a few tribes
nption of a common historical
: of anyone tribe, more or less
iY be found among a great diver­
been collected to a vast extent
many others, so that it is not
s fact. The idea of a future life,
ch as fire and the bow; certain
these will suggest the classes of
lese observations that when we
19 distant peoples, the presump­
lrical source, but that they have
I ideas is only the beginning of
uiry must answer two questions
md second, how do they assert
Ine to answer. The ideas do not
lry. Sufficient material has been
.riations are ei ther external, that
wironment in its widest sense­
I conditions. The influence of
deas embodies one group of laws
Ir endeavors must be directed to
ideas.
f and which has been general1y
~ and classify causes by grouping
na according to external condi'
1m they are found, or to internal
sely, by grouping these variants
~lated conditions of life may be
5nize even now with imperfect
)een at work in shaping the cui,
McGee have investigated the
,roader basis of facts than Ritter
ciologists have made important
ition and of other simple social
s upon the growth of society is
also being studied in the same
nena of suggestion and of hyp'
:e in the cultures of various peo '
-' l __ L __ ;_~_~L~•., ..h~·
The Limltatil'm of the Compatative Method of Anthropology 87
'n cultural elements are easily assimilated while others are rejected; and
c~:t~~me,worn phrases of the imposition of culture by a more highly civilized
t pie upon one of lower culture that has been conquered are giving way to
peore thorough views on the subject of exchange of cultural achievements. In
~fthese investigations we are using sound, inductive methods in order to iso­
I te the causes of observed phenomena.
a The other question in regard to the universal ideas, namely, that of
their origin, is much more difficult to treat. Many attempts have been made to
discover the causes which have led to the formation of ideas "that develop with
iron necessity wherever man lives:' This is the most difficult problem of anthro­
pology and we may expect that it will baffle our attempts for a long time to
come. Bastian denies that it is possible to discover the ultimate sources of
inventions, ideas, customs and beliefs which are of universal occurrence. They
may be indigenous, they may be imported, they may have arisen from a variety
of sources, but they are there. The human mind is so formed that it invents
them spontaneously or accepts them whenever they are offered to it. This is the
much misunderstood elementary idea of Bastian.
To a certain extent the clear enunciation of the elementary idea
gives us the psychological reason for its existence. To exemplify: the fact that
the land of the shadows is so often placed in the west suggests the endeavor to
localize it at the place where the sun and the stars vanish. The mere statement
that primitive man considers animals as gifted with all the qualities of man
shows that the analogy between many of the qualities of animals and human
qualities has led to the generalization that all the qualities of animals are
human. In other cases the causes are not so self-evident. Thus the question why
al1languages distinguish between the self, the person addressed and the person
spoken of, and why most languages do not carry out this sharp, logical distinc­
tion in the plural is difficult to answer. The principle when carried out consis­
tently requires that in the plural there should be a distinction between the "we'
expressing the self and the person addressed and the "we' expressing the self and
the person spoken of, which distinction is found in comparatively few lan­
guages only. The lesser liability to misunderstandings in the plural explains this
Phenomenon partly but hardly adequately. Still more obscure is the psychologi­
cal basis in other cases, for instance, in that of widely spread marriage customs.
Proof of the difficulty of this problem is the multitude of hypotheses that have
been invented to explain it in all its varied phases.
In treating this, the most difficult problem of anthropology, the
Point of view is taken that if an ethnological phenomenon has developed inde­
Pendently in a number of places its development has been the same every­
Where; or, expressed in a different form, that the same ethnological phenomena
. are always due to the same causes. This leads to the still wider generalization
;1 that the sameness of ethnological phenomena found in diverse regions is proof
that the human mind obeys the same laws everywhere. It is obvious that if
different historical developments could lead to the same results, that then this
generalization would not be tenable. Their existence would present to us an
entirely different problem, namely, how it is that the developments of culture
.Il::r.. ............ .0."" 1.c. . . . r1 for........ trh£Jl C'OrY"\£30 ,...o..,.~~l ..", T... ......... ~~ ........ ....hr. ..r..(r"'_,-.,. L .............. 1.......... _1 .... _....1 ..... -. .. __ ..1 ... 1- .........

00 rranz Ooas

anthropological research which compares similar cultural phenomena from the same causes, and that thus it is proved
various parts of the world, in order to discover the uniform history of their laws everywhere. We must demand that tl
development, makes the assumption that the same ethnological phenomenon investigated and that comparisons be re
has everywhere developed in the same manner. Here lies the flaw in the argu­ have been proved to be effects of the same
ment of the new method, for no such proof can be given. Even the most cursory tigation be made a preliminary to all
review shows that the same phenomena may develop in a multitude of ways. researches on tribal societies those which
I will give a few examples: Primitive tribes are almost universally must be treated separately from those tha
divided into clans which have totems. There can be no doubt that this form tion. Geometrical designs which have aris
of social organization has arisen independently over and over again. The Con­ tions of natural objects must be treated s(
clusion is certainly justified that the psychical conditions of man favor the exis­ from technical motives. In short, before I
tence of a totemistic organization of society, but it does not follow that comparability of the material must be pr
totemistic society has developed everywhere in the same manner. Dr. Washing­ The comparative studies of w
ton Matthews has shown that the totems of the Navajo have arisen by associa­ explain customs and ideas of remarkable
tion of independent clans. Capt. Bourke has pointed out that similar there. But they pursue also the more amb
occurrences gave origin to the Apache clans, and Dr. Fewkes has reached the and the history of the evolution of hum
same conclusion in regard to some of the Pueblo tribes. On the other hand, we damental features of culture are universa
have proof that clans may originate by division. I have shown that such events places, interpreted by the assumption tha
took place among the Indians of the North Pacific coast. Association of small developed from the same causes, leads to t
tribes, on the one hand, and disintegration of increasing tribes, on the other, system according to which mankind has
has led to results which appear identical to all intents and purposes. occurring variations are no more than mil
Here is another example. Recent investigations have shown that lution. It is clear that this theory has for
geometrical designs in primitive art have originated either from naturalistic the same phenomena are always due to t:
forms which were gradually conventionalized or from technical motives, or that We find many types of structure of family. I
they were primarily geometrical or that they were derived from symbols. From have often developed from maternal ones.
all these sources the same forms have developed. Out of designs representing ilies have developed from maternal ones. I­
diverse objects grew in course of time frets, meanders, crosses and the like. the same phenomena have everywhere d,
Therefore the frequent occurrence of these forms proves neither common ori­ we may just as well conclude that patern
gin nor that they have always developed according to the same psychical laws. from maternal institutions, in other cases
On the contrary, the identical result may have been reached on four different pie: Many conceptions of the future life h
lines of development and from an infinite number of starting points. and hallucinations. Consequently, it is sa
Another example may not be amiss: The use of masks is found had the same origin. This is also true only
among a great number of peoples. The origin of the custom of wearing masks to the same ideas.
is by no means clear in all cases, but a few typical forms of their use may easily We have seen that the facts d
be distinguished. They are used for deceiving spirits as to the identity of the we are speaking at all; that they much ra
wearer. The spirit of a disease who intends to attack the person does not recog­ Therefore we must also consider all the il
nize him when he wears a mask, and the mask serves in this manner as a protec­ a grand system of the evolution of societ
tion. In other cases the mask represents a spirit which is personified by the the same time proof is given that the sal
wearer, who in this shape frightens away other hostile spirits. Still other masks any other method. Until this is done, th
are commemorative. The wearer personifies a deceased person whose memory variety of courses which historical growt
is to be recalled. Masks are also used in theatrical performances illustrating It will be well to restate at tr
mythological incidents (Andree 1889:107 ff.). anthropological research. We agreed tha
These few data suffice to show that the same ethnical phenomenon growth of human culture, and it is our (
may develop from different sources. The simpler the observed fact, the more object of our investigation is to find the p
likely it is that it may have developed from one source here, from another there. ture have developed. The customs and b
Thus we recognize that the fundamental assumption which is so objects of research. We desire to learn the
often made by modern anthropologists cannot be accepted as true in all cases. eXist-in other words we wish to discO'
We cannot say that the occurrence of the same phenomenon is always due to The method which i~ at present most fl

Jmpares similar cultural phenomena from
~r to discover the uniform history of thei
n that the same ethnological phenomeno~
lme manner. Here lies the flaw in the argu.
h proof can be given. Even the most cursory
mena may develop in a multitude of ways.
lies: Primitive tribes are almost universally
~ms. There can be no doubt that this form
:!ependently over and over again. The con­
~ psychical conditions of man favor the exis­
1 of society, but it does not follow that
~rywhere in the same manner. Dr. Washing­
otems of the Navajo have arisen by associa­
t. Bourke has pointed out that similar
lche clans, and Dr. Fewkes has reached the
Jf the Pueblo tribes. On the other hand, we
· by division. I have shown that such events
le North Pacific coast. Association of small
:egration of increasing tribes, on the other,
:ntical to all intents and purposes.
Ie. Recent investigations have shown that
rt have originated either from naturalistic
:ionalized or from technical motives, or that
that they were derived from symbols. From
we developed. Out of designs representing
:ime frets, meanders, crosses and the like.
of these forms proves neither common ori­
oped according to the same psychical laws.
It may have been reached on four different
infinite number of starting points.
not be amiss: The use of masks is found
fhe origin of the custom of wearing masks
t a few typical forms of their use may easily
· deceiving spirits as to the identity of the
ntends to attack the person does not recog­
I the mask serves in this manner as a protec­
esents a spirit which is personified by the
away other hostile spirits. Still other masks
rsonifies a deceased person whose memory
;ed in theatrical performances illustrating
89:107 ff.).
anthropological research. We agreed that certain laws exist which govern the
show that the same ethnical phenomenon
growth of human culture, and it is our endeavor to discover these laws. The
· The simpler the observed fact, the more
object of our investigation is to find the processes by which certain stages of cul­
:i from one source here, from another there.
ture have developed. The customs and beliefs themselves are not the ultimate
the fundamental assumption which is sO
ists cannot be accepted as true in all cases.
of the same phenomenon is always due to
The Limitations of the Comparative MerhoJ of Anrhropology 89
h me causes, and that thus it is proved that the human mind obeys the same
t e s:verywhere. We must demand that the causes from which it developed be
!awsstigated and that comparisons be restricted to those phenomena which
~v:
v
been proved to be effects of the same causes. We must insist that this inves­
.a tion be made a preliminary to all extended comparative studies. In
t1g:arches on tribal societies those which have developed through association
re~st be treated separately from those that have developed through disintegra­
~on. Geometrical designs which have arisen from conventionalized representa­
tions of natural objects must be treated separately from those that have arisen
from technical motives. In short, before extended comparisons are made, the
comparability of the material must be proved.
The comparative studies of which I am speaking here attempt to
explain customs and ideas of remarkable similarity which are found here and
there. But they pursue also the more ambitious scheme of discovering the laws
and the history of the evolution of human society. The fact that many fun­
damental features of culture are universal, or at lease occur in many isolated
places, interpreted by the assumption that the same features must always have
developed from the same causes, leads to the conclusion that there is one grand
system according to which mankind has developed everywhere; that all the
occurring variations are no more than minor details in this grand uniform evo­
lution. It is clear that this theory has for its logical basis the assumption that
the same phenomena are always due to the same causes. To give an instance:
We find many types of structure offamily. It can be proved that paternal families
have often developed from maternal ones. Therefore, it is said, all paternal fam­
ilies have developed from maternal ones. If we do not make the assumption that
the same phenomena have everywhere developed from the same causes, then
we may just as well conclude that paternal families have in some cases arisen
from maternal institutions, in other cases in other ways. To give another exam­
ple: Many conceptions of the future life have evidently developed from dreams
and hallucinations. Consequently, it is said, all notions of this character have
had the same origin. This is also true only if no other causes could possibly lead
to the same ideas.
We have seen that the facts do not favor the assumption of which
We are speaking at all; that they much rather point in the opposite direction.
Therefore we must also consider all the ingenious attempts at constructions of
~grand system of the evolution of society as of very doubtful value, unless at
t e same time proof is given that the same phenomena could not develop by
any. other method. Until this is done, the presumption is always in favor of a
vanety of courses which historical growth may have taken.
It will be well to restate at this place one of the principal aims of
ob~ects of research. We desire to learn the reasons why such customs and beliefs
eXist-in other words, we wish to discover the history of their development.
e method which i.~ ::It nTP.~pnt m()~t fTN111pntl" ::lnnl;p,-l in in"p~~ia"~;An~ Af
~lJ rranz tloas
this character compares the variations under which the customs or beliefs occur
and endeavors to find the common psychological cause that underlies all of
them. I have stated that this method is open to a very fundamental objection.
We have another method, which in many respects is much safer. A
detailed study of customs in their bearings to the total culture of the tribe
practicing them, and in connection with an investigation of their geographical
distribution among neighboring tribes, affords us almost always a means of
determining with considerable accuracy the historical causes that led to the
formation of the customs in question and to the psychological processes that
were at work in their development. The results of inquiries conducted by this
method may be three-fold. They may reveal the environmental conditions
which have created or modified cultural elements; they may clear up psycho­
logical factors which are at work in shaping the culture; or they may bring
before our eyes the effects that historical connections have had upon the
growth of the culture.
We have in this method a means of reconsttucting the history of the
growth of ideas with much greater accuracy than the generalizations of the
comparative method will permit. The latter must always proceed from a
hypothetical mode of development, the probability of which may be weighed
more or less accurately by means of observed data. But so far I have not yet seen
any extended attempt to prove the correctness of a theory by testing it at the
hand of developments with whose histories we are familiar. This method of
starting with a hypothesis is infinitely inferior to the one in which by truly
inductive processes the actual history of definite phenomena is derived. The
latter is no other than the much ridiculed historical method. Its way of proceed­
ing is, of course, no longer that of former times when slight similarities of cul­
ture were considered proofs of relationships, but it duly recognizes the results
obtained by comparative studies. Its application is based, first of all, on a well­
defined, small geographical territory, and its comparisons are not extended
beyond the limits of the cultural area that forms the basis of the study. Only
when definite results have been obtained in regard to this area is it permissible
to extend the horizon beyond its limits, but the greatest care must be taken not
to proceed too hastily in this, as else the fundamental proposition which I for­
mulated before might be overlooked, viz.: that when we find an analogy of sin­
gle traits of culture among distant peoples the presumption is not that there has
been a common historical source, but that they have arisen independently.
Therefore the investigation must always demand continuity of distribution as
one of the essential conditions for proving historical connection, and the
assumption of lost connecting links must be applied most sparingly. This clear
distinction between the new and the old historical methods is still often over­
looked by the passionate defenders of the comparative method. They do not
appreciate the difference between the indiscriminate use of similarities of cul­
ture for proving historical connection and the careful and slow detailed study
of local phenomena. We no longer believe that the slight similarities between
the cultures of Central America and of eastern Asia are sufficient and satisfac­
tory proof of a historical connection. On the contrary, analogy of other similari­
ties makes such a connection improbable. But, on the other hand, no unbiased
observer will deny that there are very strong rea
number of cultural elements found in Alaska
origin. The similarities of inventions, custom:
continuity of their distribution through a com]
factory proof of this opinion. But it is not po
beyond the limits of Columbia River in Ameri
This method of anthropological research is rep
F. W. Putnam and Prof. Otis T. Mason; in En~
many by Friedrich Ratzel and his followers.
It seems necessary to say a word hi
many arguments that will be raised by investi~
of geographical environment is a sufficient cal
is to say, that, for instance, the geographical cor
sissippi basin necessitate the development of a
who would even go so far as to believe that sin
be due to environmental causes. Environment
the culture of man, but I do not see how the vit
of culture can be supported by any facts. Aha:
pIes of our globe shows that people most dive
under the same geographical conditions, as pn
the ethnography of East Africa or of New Guin
a great diversity of customs in small areas. Bu
Not one observed fact can be brought forwal
which cannot be much better explained by tl
of culture; for archaeology as well as ethnogra
between neighboring tribes has always existed
areas. In the Old World the products of the Ba
terranean and the works of art of the eastern
In America the shells of the ocean found th
of the continent and the obsidians of the Wes
riages, war, slavery, trade, have been so many
of foreign cultural elements, so that an assimi
place over continuous areas. Therefore, it see
neighboring tribes an immediate influence 0
to exist, the presumption must always be i
There has been a time of isolation during whl
<;ultures developed according to the characte
But the stages of culture representing this p
much that is new and that is due to contact w"
be discovered without the most painstaking
The immediate results of the hist,
ries of the cultures of diverse tribes which hay
agree with those anthropologists who claim
~f Our science, because the general laws, alt
h,
tlo cannot be clearly formulated nor their
at orough comparison of the manner in whi
ent cultures. But I insist that the application

r which the customs or beliefs occur
)logical cause that underlies all of
n to a very fundamental objection.
:l in many respects is much safer. A
:s to the total culture of the tribe
. investigation of their geographical
ords us almost always a means of
Ie historical causes that led to the
:0 the psychological processes that
;ults of inquiries conducted by this
~al the environmental conditions
~ments; they may clear up psycho­
19 the culture; or they may bring
connections have had upon the
of reconstructing the history of the
:y than the generalizations of the
tter must always proceed from a
bability of which may be weighed
data. But so far I have not yet seen
ess of a theory by testing it at the
, we are familiar. This method of
:ior to the one in which by truly
finite phenomena is derived. The
torical method. Its way of proceed­
les when slight similarities of cul­
but it duly recognizes the results
ion is based, first of all, on a well­
ts comparisons are not extended
Jrms the basis of the study. Only
'egard to this area is it permissible
le greatest care must be taken not
lamental proposition which I for-
It when we find an analogy of sin­
presumption is not that there has
they have arisen independently.
and continuity of distribution as
historical connection, and the
lpplied most sparingly. This clear
orical methods is still often over­
mparative method. They do not
lminate use of similarities of cul­
e careful and slow detailed study
at the slight similarities between
:l Asia are sufficient and satisfac­
mtrary, analogy of other similari­
. on the other h;:Jn(l nn lInhi"spd
The Limitations of the Comparative Method t,f Anthropology 91
bse rver will deny that there are very strong reasons for believing that a limited
oumber of cultural elements found in Alaska and in Siberia have a common
~rigin. The similarities of inventions, customs and beliefs, together with the
continuity of their distribution through a comparatively small area, are a satis­
factory proof of this opinion. But it is not possible to extend this area safely
beyond the limits of Columbia River in America and northern Japan in Asia.
This method of anthropological research is represented in our country by Prof.
F. W. putnam and Prof. Otis T. Mason; in England by Dr. E. B. Tylor; in Ger­
many by Friedrich Ratzel and his followers.
It seems necessary to say a word here in regard to an objection to
many arguments that will be raised by investigators who claim that similarity
of geographical environment is a sufficient cause for similarity of culture, that
is to say, that, for instance, the geographical conditions of the plains of the Mis­
sissippi basin necessitate the development of a certain culture. There are those
who would even go so far as to believe that similarity of form of language may
be due to environmental causes. Environment has a certain limited effect upon
the culture of man, but I do not see how the view that it is the primary moulder
of culture can be supported by any facts. A hasty review of the tribes and peo­
ples of our globe shows that people most diverse in culture and language live
under the same geographical conditions, as proof of which may be mentioned
the ethnography of East Africa or of New Guinea. In both these regions we find
a great diversity of customs in small areas. But much more important is this:
Not one observed fact can be brought forward in support of this hypothesis
which cannot be much better explained by the well known facts of diffusion
of culture; for archaeology as well as ethnography teaches us that intercourse
between neighboring tribes has always existed and has extended over enormous
areas. In the Old World the products of the Baltic found their way to the Medi­
terranean and the works of art of the eastern Mediterranean reached Sweden.
In America the shells of the ocean found their way into the innermost parts
of the continent and the obsidians of the West were carried to Ohio. Intermar­
riages, war, slavery, trade, have been so many sources of constant introduction
of foreign cultural elements, so that an assimilation of culture must have taken
I
place Over continuous areas. Therefore, it seems to my mind that where among
neighboring tribes an immediate influence of environment cannot be shown
to exist, the presumption must always be in favor of historical connection.
There has been a time of isolation during which the principal traits of diverse
~ultures developed according to the character and environment of the tribes.
Ut the stages of culture representing this period have been covered with so
bUc~ that is new and that is due to contact with foreign tribes that they cannot
e discovered without the most painstaking isolation of foreign elements.
. The immediate results of the historical method are, therefore, histo­
Ties of the cultures of diverse tribes which have been the subject of study. I fully
aree With those anthropologists who claim that this is not the ultimate aim
~. our SCience, because the general laws, although implied in such a descrip­
lOb' cannot be clearly formulated nor their relative value appreciated without
at orough comparison of the manner in which they assert themselves in differ­
,Ultllr.c:.C' n.~ .. T ;....... :....... l-" .......... hL"'- ..... __ 1;.,..... ....... ; . . . . _ ..... £ ..L~~ ~ ........L_..J ~_ ....L _ ~ __ ...1~ ~ 1. 1

condition of sound progress. The psychological problem is contained in the believe it will not become fruitful until we
results of the historical inquiry. When we have cleared up the history of a single struct a uniform systematic history of thE
culture and understand the effects of environment and the psychological condi­ begin to make our comparisons on the bro
tions that are reflected in it we have made a step forward, as we can then investigate tured to outline. Up to this time we hav
in how far the same causes or other causes were at work in the development of ingenious vagaries. The solid work is still
other cultures. Thus by comparing histories of growth general laws may be
found. This method is much safer than the comparative method, as it is usually
practiced, because instead of a hypothesis on the mode of development actual Note
history forms the basis of our deductions.
The historical inquiry must be considered the critical test that sci­ 1. Paper read at the meetings of the Amer
ence must require before admitting facts as evidence. By its means the compara­ of Science, Buffalo, New York.
bility of the collected material must be tested, and uniformity of processes must
be demanded as proof of comparability. It may also be mentioned that when
historical connection between two phenomena can be proved, they must not Reference
be admitted as independent evidence.
In a few cases the immediate results of this method are of so wide Andree, Richard
1889 Ethnographische Parallelen und Vc
a scope that they rank with the best results that can be attained by comparative
studies. Some phenomena have so immense a distribution that the discovery
of their occurrence over very large continuous areas proves at once that certain
phases of the culture in these areas have sprung from one source. Thus are illu­
minated vast portions of the early history of mankind. When Prof. Morse
showed that certain methods of arrow release are peculiar to whole continents
it became clear at once that the common practice that is found over a vast area 5. The Methoc

must have had a common origin. When the Polynesians employ a method of
fire making consisting in rubbing a stick along a groove, while almost all other
peoples use the fire drill, it shows their art of fire making has a single origin. During the last ten years the rr
When we notice that the ordeal is found all over Africa in certain peculiar development of civilization have undergc
forms, while in those parts of the inhabited world that are remote from Africa second half of the last century evolutionar
it is found not at all or in rudimentary forms only, it shows that the idea as prac­ and investigators like Spencer, Morgan, 1)
ticed in Africa had one single origin. were under the spell of the idea of a gent
The great and important function of the historical method of which all parts of mankind participated. l
anthropology is thus seen to lie in its ability to discover the processes which in part to the influence of Ratzel, whose geog
definite cases led to the development of certain customs. If anthropology desires the importance of diffusion and migration
to establish the laws governing the growth of culture it must not confine itself up in detail particularly in America, but \
to comparing the results of the growth alone, but whenever such is feasible it Fay and Graebner, and finally seized upor
must compare the processes of growth, and these can be discovered by means Smith and Rivers, so that at the present t
of studies of the cultures of small geographical areas. investigators in England and also in Germ
Thus we have seen that the comparative method can hope to reach the concept of migration and disseminatic
the grand results for which it is striving only when it bases its investigations on . A critical study of these two (
the historical results of researches which are devoted to laying clear the com­ IS founded on the application of one funda

plex relations of each individual culture. The comparative method and the his­ ~oint of view presupposes that the coursE
torical method, if I may use these terms, have been struggling for supremacy for ltfe of mankind follows definite laws wi
a long time, but we may hope that each will soon find its appropriate place and which bring it about that cultural develo
function. The historical method has reached a sounder basis by abandoning the
misleading principle of assuming connections wherever similarities of culture
were found. The comparative method, notwithstanding all that has been said ~~:inted by permisslon of the American Anthropol
and written in its praise, has been remarkably barren of definite results, and I . ,1920. Not for further reproduction.

,ychological problem is contained in the
1 we have cleared up the history of a single
~nvironment and the psychological condi.
de a step forward, as we can then investigate
auses were at work in the development of
histories of growth general laws may be
n the comparative method, as it is usually
hesis on the mode of development actual
tions.
1St be considered the critical test that sci.
cts as evidence. By its means the compara­
Ie tested, and uniformity of processes must
ity. It may also be mentioned that when
henomena can be proved, they must not
e.
iate results of this method are of so wide
~sults that can be attained by comparative
nmense a distribution that the discovery
ntinuous areas proves at once that certain
we sprung from one source. Thus are illu­
history of mankind. When Prof. Morse
v release are peculiar to whole continents
non practice that is found over a vast area
hen the Polynesians employ a method of
ick along a groove, while almost all other
eir art of fire making has a single origin.
round all over Africa in certain peculiar
labited world that are remote from Africa
.forms only, it shows that the idea as prac­
I.
t function of the historical method of
ability to discover the processes which in
)f certain customs. If anthropology desires
-owth of culture it must not confine itself
:h alone, but whenever such is feasible it
n, and these can be discovered by means
)graphical areas.
e comparative method can hope to reach
Ig only when it bases its investigations on
lich are devoted to laying clear the com­
lre. The comparative method am~ the his­
ilS, have been struggling for supremacy for
:h will soon find its appropriate place and
eached a sounder basis by abandoning the
mections wherever similarities of culture
i, notwithstanding all that has been said
markablv barren of definite results, and 1
The Limitations of rhe Comparative Method of Anthropology 93
believe it will not become .frui~ul until we renoun~e the vain endeavor to .con­
ct a uniform systematiC history of the evolution of culture, and until we
: i n to make our compari~on~ on the broader and sounder ba~is which I ven­
red to outline. Up to thiS time we have too much reveled 10 more or less
~~geniouS vagaries. The solid work is still all before us.
Note
Paper read at the meetings of the American Association for the Advancement
1.
of Science, Buffalo, New York.
Reference
Andree, Richard
1889 Ethnographische Paral/elen und Vergleiche. Neue Folge.
5. The Methods of Ethnology
During the last ten years the methods of inquiry into the historical
development of civilization have undergone remarkable changes. During the
second half of the last century evolutionary thought held almost complete sway
and investigators like Spencer, Morgan, Tylor, Lubbock, to mention only a few,
were under the spell of the idea of a general, uniform evolution of culture in
which all parts of mankind participated. The newer development goes back in
part to the influence of Ratzel , whose geographical training impressed him with
the importance of diffusion and migration. The problem of diffusion was taken
up in detail particularly in America, but was applied in a much wider sense by
Fay and Graebner, and finally seized upon in a still wider application by Elliot
~mith and Rivers, so that at the present time, at least among certain groups of
investigators in England and also in Germany, ethnological research is based on
the concept of migration and dissemination rather than upon that of evolution.
. A critical study of these two directions of inquiry shows that each
is f?unded on the application of one fundamental hypothesis. The evolutionary
ITint of view presupposes that the course of historical changes in the cultural
i e. of mankind follows definite laws which are applicable everywhere, and
which bring it about that cultural development is, in its main lines, the same
'4 by permission of the American Anthropologocal Association from Amencan Anthropologist
. , 1920. Not for further reproduction.