1.1 A Short History of Anthropology

Anthropology is considered a living discipline. This is because it studies human bodies and cultures who are constantly in flux, and the discipline needs to be responsive to these changes. Often, anthropology involves multisite research and integrative methods, resulting in new methods and questions for the next generation. It is a result of this adaptability that anthropology became a four-field approach in the United States (it is still divided a bit differently in the U.K. and Europe).

Early Anthropology

Anthropology began as a philosophical framing of human differences. E.B. Tylor and Louis Henry Morgan are most frequently associated with this early concept of unilineal cultural evolution. Unilineal evolution argued that human societies exist on hierarchies of civilization. That is, that the more technologically advanced or educated a society becomes, the more “evolved” it is. You may have even heard this discussed or referenced in conversations at home, school, or church.

The problem with unilineal cultural evolution is that it assumes one “right” way of living. That leads to something called ethnocentrism – the belief that one’s way of living is “right” or “natural.” Studies of human behavior across cultures tells us this couldn’t be further from the truth.

Franz Boas

Franz Boas came to the United States to escape the challenges of Germany in the early 20^th century. His focus was on salvage ethnography. This is a fancy way of saying he liked to collect things from all over the world and try to understand their meaning to the relevant culture. Boas is considered the father of modern anthropology.

Why? Boas was the first to emphasize the importance of a people’s history in understanding their culture. This concept, historical particularism, encouraged anthropologists to view other cultures not as “less evolved,” but rather, as having a different history. This is important to us because understanding begins with embracing differences as natural – in evolutionary theory we call this variation. Viewing cultures through this lens, we can engage cultural relativism – the belief that cultural ethics and practices are contextual – the counter to ethnocentrism. Boas argued that anthropology needed to be arranged into subfields that could focus on different components of humanity.

After Boas, numerous anthropological subfields and foci began to develop. Some subfields focused on storytelling and cultural norms; others focused on the things that make up culture (material culture). For this book, it is important to know that the result of these methodological and conceptual differences resulted in what we now call the “Four Field Approach.” Simply put, there are four main subfields of anthropology, each with its own additional specialties.