"A central paradox of archeology is that discovery involves destruction: investigation requires intrusion."
"Anthropology is nowhere because, unlike chemistry, literature, or history, it is still not recognized as one of the fields essential to the academy and unlike economics, law, or medicine (or public health administration, social work, or library science), it is not known to be crucial to society." ~ James Peacock
"One could say that anthropology assumed the mission of serving as an advance scout for social science, following close behind missionaries as handmaidens to imperialism." ~ Judith Stacey
"Archaeologists tend to be more comfortable digging holes in the ground... They tend to focus on a very small sample of things that they find in one small excavation, and as a result they are missing the big picture." ~ Larry Conyers
"Anthropology considered itself to be the study of 'primitive'
humans in
their 'natural' states; field work allowed anthropologists to imagine
that
they could observe subjects just as natural scientists do in a
laboratory." ~
Joanne Passaro
"...Anthropologists are between humanities and the social sciences,
right? And so it's frustrating because you don't know where to go to
find articles. I would really appreciate a database that puts all those
things together." ~ anon.
"Anthropology's blessing -- and its curse -- is that few people know
anything about it. I am just as likely to be asked to talk about the
mythical significance of yams as I am about carbon dating of human
remains -- two things which, remarkably, I know nothing about." ~
Christopher Kilty
"Anthropology holds fascination for many people, with good reason:
its subject matter is no less than the entire range of human
experience." ~ Harris
"Archaeologists recognize that their craft is as much art as
science, as giving meaning to a collection of artifacts requires a
number of assumptions and guesses and does not provide the truth about
the mental state of the users." ~ Scott Nicholson
"'So how do you feel about e-mail?'" asks Simon Roberts, a social
anthropologist. 'How has it changed your workload'? This is not what
social anthropologists are usually expected to ask: they observe
courtship rituals, try to interpret ancient chants, analyze gift-giving
or tribal cosmology." ~ Gillian Tett
"Globalization was ringing radio, chewing gum and disease to the
most remote people (in my case, Tajik villagers were watching Brazilian
soap opera on Russian TV." ~ Gillian Tett
Anthropos means human and logia is study so that anthropology is the study of humans. More specifically, it is the study of human differences, cultural and biological, in the context of human nature. Anthropologists identify and compare behavior of a particular group against the full range of human behavior. These comparisons should uncover principles that apply to all human communities. However, until after the Second World War, anthropology focused almost exclusively on non-Western or tribal peoples. In fact, this "third world focus" was the distinguishing characteristic of the discipline. In fact, for a long time anthropologists assumed that non-European cultures were different enough to warrant a different social science discipline to study them. This assumption seems less persuasive today.
Anthropologists studied the way of life, remains, language, and
physical
characteristics of primitive people -- social facts. Social facts might
include how people celebrate a holiday or when they exchange gifts.
Customs, values, and social
patterns of
different cultures were described and sometimes compared. How are
different
people in different places similar and different, both biologically and
behaviorally? Spotting cultural patterns requires "fresh, neutral
eyes."
Anthropology has taken an evolutionary approach to the study of human behavior. The discipline began as a kind of natural history of the peoples encountered along the frontiers. Study was built upon the assumption that humans and human behavior had evolved and that Europeans had evolved far beyond the primitive people being studied. Anthropologists were concerned with the origin and the physical, social, and cultural development and behavior of humans as they evolved.
Anthropologists are slightly more interested in topics than in particular places. However, the environmental context has always been important. Comparative study is important and may lead to universal patterns. Kinship is probably the most popular topic today and in the past. Historically, these topics have been investigated in small-scale traditional societies.
"Field work has always been on a kind of border between the sciences
and the humanities -- "science because it is supposed to be empirical
and observational, and humanities because it deals with language,
culture, and aesthetic issues." Field work with exotic peoples has been
viewed as the major channel
for
maximizing status payoffs in the profession. This participant research
is qualitative and creates certain problems for the disciple.
Field work is a rite of passage. Historically, anthropologists from the U.K. and Europe were associated with European colonialism. The study of non-Europeans by Europeans is still a sore point in many developing countries. Western scholars have been slow to recognize the value of research done by non-Western scholars. Some critics view the field anthropologist as a kind of tourist. Research tends to be descriptive and qualitative based upon lengthy interviews and much detailed observation [story telling?]. Analysis and documentation of a culture via field work is called ethnography.
Anthropology may be the only social science discipline to include the natural or biological sciences while retaining many of the characteristics of the humanistic discipline. Physical anthropology has most of the hallmarks of a natural science. Cultural anthropology, telling a story, has many of the hallmarks of history. As the science of man, dealing with past and present behavior, the commonplace and the extraordinary, anthropology could claim to be THE social science.
Anthropology may be the most holistic of the social science disciplines. It is strongly interdisciplinary in borrowing from other disciplines. There are close links to general science, sociology, biology, history, linguistics, medicine, psychology, and the arts (note the role of art and religion in most primitive cultures). Anthropology is relatively isolated in that few social science disciplines borrow from it. As anthropology focuses more on developing and urban societies, it will likely offer more to the other SS disciplines.
Anthropology is unique among the SS because it is not limited to man and his work, but considers the higher primates in their environment.
In order to maximize learning, anthropologists should attempt to see the culture from inside it. Thus, the cultural anthropologist attempts to discover how people see their world. Since they often spent many years living within the culture they studied, anthropologists often identified with the tribal group. Anthropology fosters a tolerance for different ways of living. Some anthropologists are strongly associated with the rights of native peoples to live their life without external threats. Thus, some anthropologists could be seen as an "enemy of progress."
Archeology excavates, collects, systematically
describes, analyzes (classifies
and
orders chronologically) the remains of ancient civilizations,
especially
technological and material objects in order to make statements about
those who occupied a physical space. Systematic recovery and
examination
of
material evidence, such as graves, buildings, tools, and pottery, from
past
human life and culture determines customs and living habits through
historical reconstruction. Archeology is midway between history and
anthropology. A strong relationship with history. Scientific tools,
including
chemical and electronic measuring devices, are used. There are
relationships
with chemistry, geography, soil science, geomorphology, zoo archeology,
and
botany. Archeology is moving from a predominantly descriptive
cultural-historical focus to more emphasis on explanation.
Cultural
resource management is a branch of archeology that helps
government
and other non-profit organizations preserve architectural, historical,
and
cultural heritage. "New Archeology" became somewhat popular in the
1970s. It begins with a problem question or statement and then searches
for artifacts to support or reject. Traditional archeology found
artifacts and sought patterns in what was found.
Physical or biological anthropology describes the evolution and present biological characteristics of our species considering biochemical, genetic, and cultural factors. Biological origins [skeletal biology] and genetic diversity [gene-environment interactions] are popular topics. There may be comparison with non-human primates. Body measurements over time allow evolutionary change to be examined and documented. Evolution of the brain and nervous system are of particular interest. Recently, there has been increased interest in the genetics of human populations and adaptations to the environment using scientific and medical research methods and tools. Strong relationships exist with biology, geology, and evolutionary biology. May be seen as a bridge between the social and biological sciences.
Cultural anthropology compares social and cultural systems, particularly customs, values, and beliefs. There is a strong interest in how culture changes over time and in cross-cultural comparison that may lead to universal generalizations. Sometimes, this is called ethnology. Technically, "ethnographers" went into the field to gather facts while "ethologists" assembled facts into general theories. Ethnography, the "science of description," deals with the unique, a single group while Ethnology deals with patterns seen in different groups or cultures. Cultural anthropology is the largest component of the discipline we call "anthropology." Culture is that database of knowledge, values, and traditional ways of viewing the world that determines much of our behavior. Social structure (personal relationships and status in groups), especially kinship and marriage networks, but also family structures and property rights are integral parts of "culture." Of interest to political scientists (political anthropology) is the role of power relationships within the culture. The interaction between technology and a culture is also important. Cultural anthropologists hope to understand the internal logic of another society in its own terms. Cultural anthropology is closely related to sociology, history, religious studies and art.
Linguistics defines the varieties of speech and the relationships among the tongues of humans and primates, primarily in non-Western settings.. Linguistic scholars study the history, evolution, and internal structure of languages. They are also interested in the hidden connections between language, brain, and behavior.
Human ecology studies human adaptation to ecosystems. It is much more than a fancy name for home economics.
Political anthropology is the comparative study of political institutions and processes (especially in primitive societies).
Economic anthropology is the comparative study of production and exchange, especially in non-Western or primitive societies.
Psychological anthropology looks at the psychological experience in non-Western societies.
Legal anthropology is the comparative study of social control and conflict resolution in non-Western societies.
Urban anthropology is the comparative study of human experience and relations (culture) in an urban setting.
Applied anthropology uses anthropological research and insights to solve social problems.
Women's anthropology is the comparative study of female experience and status, especially in non-Western societies.
Medical anthropology is the comparative study of health, disease, and medicine, especially in non-Western societies.
Cultural anthropology goes back to Greek historians who described the customs of various peoples, especially primitive ones. Thoughtful travelers through the ages have described interesting behavior and artifacts in primitive, non-Western societies.
However, study and teaching accelerated in the period of European
expansion as Europeans explored and conquered what became known as the
developing countries. Colonial administrators, missionaries,
travelers/explorers vigorously described and collected. There was much
speculation about the evolution of civilization, and the development of
races. The "White Race" was seen as superior and colored races as
inferior.
The Society of Antiquaries, London, 1717 - 1770, published a
quasi-scientific
periodical Archaeologia. Colonial administrators used
anthropologists to help figure out how to best control natives.
When Darwinian evolution became popular, there was growing agreement that anatomy, physiology, philology, archeology and geology were advanced enough to now support a science of man. The first anthropological association was established in Paris in 1839. Detailed study of local and regional artifacts, languages, societies, and cultures began. In 1859, Darwin's Origin of the Species was published. The Victorian gentlemen scholars were usually amateurs, but often were thorough and competent. The discovery of prehistoric sites stimulated archeology, especially in Northern Africa and the Middle East. The collapse of the Ottoman Empire further stimulated exploration and made it easier in Greece, Egypt, and Fertile Crescent. A large number of collections of artifacts were sent to European museums where they remain today (controversy). Anthropology at this time was a very DESCRIPTIVE science, and one focused on evolution: "reconstructing the development of human cultures from the earliest 'savage' state of primitive promiscuity, through the progressive evolution of 'barbarism' and finally to 'civilization.'
Note that describing social relations involves many difficult decisions and objectivity may be difficult. You record only what you see. What you see may be a function of your own culture. You see what you think is notable. Photography, developed in the 1840s-1850s, revolutionized recording. It became easier to record and much easier to see since there is now the possibility of detailed and repeated examination. Evidence becomes more reliable. Aerial photography in the late 1920s eventually led to satellite imagery of considerable utility in finding and marking archaeological sites.
From 1890 - 1930, universities and museums emphasized intensive
field work
and collecting original data to gain recognition and status.
Anthropologists,
through field work, studied systems of kinship, descent and marriage.
Pre-industrial societies were of little interest to other SS
disciplines. An assumption was that only literate societies had history
so societies with oral literacy were ignored. Thus, history focused on
literate cultures and anthropology focused on those without.
Anthropology was first taught in departments of geology, biology, medicine, and history. Sociology developed at about the same time, and was often associated with anthropology. Graduate instruction began in the U.S. began in the 1880s. The first U.S. Ph.D was granted in 1892.Until WW II, anthropologists mainly studied tribal peoples in far-away locations. While there were some general natural history societies in the U.S, from 1743, the American Anthropological Association was not established until 1902.
Anthropology advanced relatively rapidly until the 1960s. Gradually, other SS disciplines increased their interest in previously "backward" areas of the world, especially after World War II. "During the 1940s and 1950s, U.S. anthropology was influenced by psychoanalytic theory. Anthropologists began to look for relationships among culturally patterned childhood experience, adult personality, and cultural beliefs and customs." At the same time, more attention was paid to meaning and symbolism in culture. After 1948, with stronger relationships to chemistry and physics, archeology became tightly bound with the physical sciences.
Absolute dating of artifacts only became possible in the 1950s with
radio-active dating. After World War II, opportunity increased
substantially
for anthropologists to work with international and regional agencies in
solving development and refugee problems. Sometimes, these scholarly
reports
were used to justify conventional wisdom or policies not in the
interest of
native peoples.
With the closure of some third world countries to anthropologists
from the developed countries, and the rapid spread of 20th Century
ideas and artifacts, anthropologists began to use their skill and
experience to study urban environments of all sorts, including those of
business and industry. Too, research involving human subjects requires
far more permissions than before. Wherever there is culture, there are
opportunities for anthropologists. This can also place them in conflict
with sociologists who have traditionally studied urban cultures.
Participant observation is the unique anthropological method. It has been borrowed by other social scientists, especially sociology. One of the difficult issues associated with this method is how to become an "invisible" insider without "going native." There are ethical problems involved in participating in some tribal customs. For example, there is the tale of the female anthropologist who "married" a chief so that she could observe certain aspects of tribal behavior. Urban anthropologists who observe illegal behavior while studying gangs or prostitutes may be forced to testify in criminal investigations and betray confidences. Field work, in an attempt to develop rapport with those studied, works best when the researcher becomes wholly accepted as members of the group. This can result in a loss of perspective. However, remaining an outsider denies the researcher opportunities to truly understand the world view of those studied.
Another crucial problem is that describing what people believe and how they act may be neither valid or reliable. Data is not likely to be exact or replicable. Some see the anthropologist's field work as "mere pieces of documentary social history."
There are between 4000 and 5000 active in the anthropological
disciplines
in the U.S. The American Anthropological Association has about 11,000
members. Of those active in the field, about 20 - 25 percent are
female. A
few are employed in industry and nonprofit organizations. For example,
knowledge management has generated interest in using anthropologists to
assess the knowledge of working people and develop more effective
processes
and procedures. Archaeologists are now required for most construction
projects to insure that no violence is done to the remains of the dead,
especially native Americans. The Federal government employs
anthropologists
in museums, parks, Indian Affairs, and foreign aid programs. Very few
are
employed by state and local government. In recent years, academic
downsizing
has taken a toll. Today, more than 40 percent of all U.S.
anthropologists
work outside of the academy. There may be as many as 250 BA, 100 MA,
and 80
Ph.D. programs in the United States. Some departments of anthropology
have
been downsized, closed, or merged with other units in the past few
years.
Little or no grow in employment opportunities is predicted for the
future.
Presently, there are more graduates than positions. Funding for
anthropological activities in education, government, and other
nonprofit
organizations has declined.
The leading university programs based on research citations are:
From the beginning, there has been considerable emphasis on the exotic. Unusual artifacts and customs received considerable attention. Many early observers were missionaries whose world view often reflected lack of tolerance and understanding of native culture. Much early reporting was done without education or training so that it may be subjective and idiosyncratic. Reports are as much a literary document as a scientific report. Replication, at the heart of the scientific enterprise, is not possible in such a situation. Collecting and exhibiting were the primary focus of anthropology in the 19th Century. Museums and world fairs were the primary institutional homes for artifacts and reports. Not until the 1930s did universities eclipse museums as the major home for anthropology.
For quite some time, anthropology employed a vision of progress with white American/European society at the top and the "savage and barbarian races" at the bottom. Progress was seen as the triumph of the superior races Like missionaries, anthropologists were frequently conspicuous in the front lines of colonialism. Native anthropologists, trained abroad, were often ambivalent about their own culture. Later, especially after the Second World War, many anthropologists advocated the equal worth of all cultures in Western intellectual circles and were advocates for native peoples before international organizations.
Everywhere primitive people are becoming modern.Traditional ways are left behind. Pre-industrial societies are disappearing. If anthropology is limited to the study of pre-industrial societies in developing countries, the future is grim. Will any small scale, rural, exotic societies remain in the future? Extended foreign field work has been an integral part of professional identity. What will replace it?
Study abroad involves a variety of political problems. Many governmental officials in developing countries, India is a good example, are suspicious of Western scholars. Distrust of the CIA and the suspicion that Western scholars are spies, as well as the fear of imperialism [cultural or political or economic] causes some governments to discourage field research by scholars from the West. Intellectuals in developing countries may also be suspicious since the data collected is analyzed and interpreted from a Western, industrial society academic world view. Data is rarely available to those studied. Native people may be fearful that data may be used to sustain power of external forces over indigenous people. Field researchers have done a poor job of training/educating local scientists to do needed research and to manage local researchers.
Each of the anthropological disciplines is involved in field work. However, the "field" is changing and diminishing. Growth and change affects "primitive populations," and artifacts buried in sites. Weather, the need to grow crops or graze herd animals, tourism, looting [many collectors pay handsomely for artifacts], and development continue to diminish the resources needed for scholarly research. Non-human primates face extinction. The past is disappearing.
Who owns the past? Native people typically don't want their burial sites disturbed or desecrated. You would be uncomfortable if the burial sites of your ancestors were part of a dig. Native remains have been treated like animal bones and fossils, not as human. Would you want your ancestors (bones, skull......) treated as curios in a museum? Some museums have hoarded artifacts and relics, denying native people access to their own history and culture. Retaining a monopoly on the interpretation of native culture and identity involves religious and political problems. Religious and other customs intended only for the particular group are now shared with an inappropriate outsider audience, an audience that may not respect and value the myth and legend involved. Many native peoples are working vigorously to close their culture and artifacts from outsiders and to force the return of their material in museums and universities. It is not likely that scholarship as we know can take place in this situation. However, the past and present arrangements are not equitable for native peoples.
The gentleman, and amateur, explorers of the 19th Century gathered attractive items and sent them home so "statues, columns, mummies, and trinkets" appeared in London, Paris and other European cities. As anthropology became more of an academic discipline with increased emphasis on accurate measurement and description of the entire site, "tomb robbing" became less common. Still, artifacts were often sent to museums and institutes back home.
Anthropological research is increasingly beset by ethical problems. The question of what to do with human remains and whether they should be returned to native groups is controversial. "Who has the first claim on buried items -- local people, the descendants of the original owners, or the researcher" involves litigation and disagreement. Should anthropological sites be "left alone as memorials, redeveloped for tourism, or preserved for future research"? While anthropologists prefer the latter, local people are not likely to agree.
"Anthropology has a strong code of ethics, but there is some question about the degree to which violation leads to sanctions.
Anthropological researchers must do everything in their power to ensure that their research does not harm the safety, dignity, or privacy of the people with whom they work."
Technology has considerable potential to reduce some problems. For example, non-destructive geophysical surveying techniques allow precise identification of particular parts of a site so that less destructive "digging" is needed. "Frugal archeology" has considerable appeal.
As opportunities for field work abroad decline, anthropology has placed more attention on field work at home. Urban anthropology is a good example of this. However, this places anthropology and sociology in a situation where there may be some conflict. Urban anthropology may look at dysfunctions in society such as gangs, drug addiction, and prostitution. An interesting example of how anthropology can be applied to contemporary urban life is retail anthropology which is the application of the principles and techniques of anthropology to retail space and operations.
State and federal law requires an archaeological survey before substantial new construction. This "contract archeology" may account for 80 percent of all archeology done in the U.S. today. The reports of this surveys are filed with the State Historic Preservation Office. This "grey" literature is valuable, but often difficult to discover and access.
With their interest in how technology shapes and is shaped by culture, anthropologists may study the effect of information technology on social, cultural practice (cyber culture).
The for-profit world has begun to discover the advantage of anthropological research. Anthropologists can be most helpful in developing programs to insure that the diverse workplace is an effective and friendly one. Anthropologists help marketers to understand how to sell products to an ethnic audience.
Over the years, many reservations have been expressed about the quality of anthropological research methods. The anthropologist in the field creates her own data. An individual's subjective interpretation of a wide variety of qualitative impressions is hardly scientific. Studies are rarely repeated. In fact, replication may not be possible with change in the community and the fact that observation changes the community in some important ways. "Anthropologists are information brokers. They do not create new information but merely redistribute it like journalists."
Field work involves direct personal involvement with the local culture. If too closely involved, "going native," the anthropologist loses objectivity and scholarly detachment to become an advocate for those studied. Facts do not speak for themselves. You select what to observe and what to analyze. Obtrusive research raises questions about reliability and validity. Anthropology, especially cultural, may be more of a craft than a science. The graduate student learns techniques via apprenticeship in the field. Growing use of the camera, audio and video recorders, and the computer has brought much greater reliability and more objectivity to the discipline. It is now possible to gather much more data in a less obtrusive manner.
While it certainly has potential, anthropology has not yet had much impact on policy makers. Cultural anthropological research could have some impact on policy toward public health, community action, and social welfare, including crime, gangs, unwed mothers and other problems where culture plays an integral role in behavior.
Anthropology is holistic and cross-cultural research is important. Anthropology may be the most interdisciplinary of the social sciences in reaching out to other social sciences, the natural sciences, and to the humanities, including art and crafts. There is a strong linkage with area studies. Virtually everything in the library might interest an anthropologist. Cultural anthropology is linked to sociology, psychology, and nutrition.
Since World War II, some anthropologists have become advocates for native peoples throughout the world. They are concerned with the privacy and dignity of all peoples. This may lead to conflict with wealthy land owners, government, and corporations. Anthropologists working on behalf of Indians in Brazil have been killed. Certainly, there was some radicalism in cultural anthropology in the 1950s and 1960s, especially re: treatment of pre-industrial societies, including Native Indians. As a discipline, anthropology promotes brotherhood, understanding, and tolerance of quite different cultures and ways of life.
Technology, such as ground-penetrating radar and remote sensing, can make it much easier for the archaeologist to discover the exact location of a site and its limits. The increasing quality and ease of use of 3D computer modeling techniques allows archaeologists to examine site details without digging. Virtual tours will also be possible. Laser scanners are used for above-ground shots and a radar sensor is used for below ground shots.
An "enormous" amount of notable digital artifacts is now created by researchers and museums. This is a boon because it allows greater access to the data, but preservation of so much data is increasingly problematic. Unless the data is refreshed or maintained, it may be lost in the near future.
Increasingly, computer technology and the Internet will allow those interested, especially students and enthusiasts, to follow researchers as they go about their work. One good example is "expeditions" by the Field Museum.
Since artifacts are widely scattered throughout the world, digitization has the potential to create integrated and accessible collections. However, for this to happen, museums must be less restrictive in providing access to "their" collections. One interesting example is the Cuneiform digital Library Initiative by UCLA and the Max Planck Institute [Berlin]. About 60,00 texts should be online soon, mostly from the period from 3200 - 2000 BCE.
All of the social sciences appear to have difficulty in getting the various segments together to share ideas and methods. In anthropology, there seems to be some conflict between those who see themselves as scientists, usually with a biological focus, and those more concerned with the traditional descriptive cultural side (humanists).
We should assume that the scholar will have [probably in her office}:
If the scholar has a core collection in her office, when will she need to use other collections, including the university library? Some possibilities are mentioned below.
Second tier current awareness periodicals not likely to be subscribed to are a possibility, but these are likely to be borrowed from a colleague's office unless they come from another discipline. Scholarly articles in periodicals outside the office collection will be requested. Expensive scholarly monographs, especially those that are not central to current research and teaching or that are no longer in print, will also be requested. Field data from comparable sites is expensive and may appear in substantial multi-volumn sets which the scholar cannot afford to buy. Increasingly, there is interest in images and videos as part of the field data.
Anthropologists often seek information by geographical area. Many library and museum collections do not provide adequate access by place.
Anthropological Literature, an RLG [now part of OCLC] Citation Resources file
updated
quarterly, is the most comprehensive international resource for the
anthropological disciplines. It is produced by the Tozzer Library at
Harvard.
Anthropology Plus, also a RLG resource, combines
The Anthropological
Index from the Royal Anthropological Institute. Anthropological
Index Online is the index to current periodicals in the The
Anthropology
Library at the British Museum (incorporating the former Royal
Anthropological
Institute library) and might be considered the British equivalent of
the
Tozzer.Abstracts in Anthropology is
published by Baywood Press. The International
Bibliography of Social and Cultural Anthropology is
issued by UNESCO's International Committee for Social Information and
Documentation. Beginning in 2005, The American Anthropological
Society and the University of California Press launched AnthroSource which includes the
digital content from all of the AAA publications.
The hope is that this will become a one stop portal for the U.S.
anthropologist.
Sociological Abstracts is especially useful for research methods and urban anthropology. America: History and Life includes some cultural anthropology and much of the archaeological literature. Arts and Humanities Citation Index in Web of Science and Web of Knowledge covers anthropology well. Art Index covers some archeology periodicals. Archeology scholars sometimes use GeoRef which is issued by the American Geological Institute (1785-). This source covers social and historical geography. Effective use requires some familiarity with its thesaurus. GeoRef is especially useful for techniques, paleontology and human prehistory. Biological Abstracts has solid sections on physical anthropology, ethobiology, evolution, paleobiology, paleozoology, paleobotany, and archaeology. Language and Language Behaviour Abstracts includes coverage of anthropological linguistics.
If anthropologists are most interested in field work accounts, how does one locate such works? Can you provide an example of notable field work?
Teachers need accurate, current synthetic treatments. Although
perhaps too
detailed and specialized, the Annual Review of Anthropology is
useful
for keeping up with major topical areas. Material likely to interest
undergraduates needs to be more popular, better organized, and
generally
appealing. There is increasing interest in videos that provide an
accurate,
interesting record of what anthropologists do and how they do it. Less
formal content such as technical papers from international
organizations, syllabi, keynote speeches, working papers, and the like
can be useful and are difficult to find and retrieve. Researchers also
find these valuable.
The textbook is a good example of what class room teachers working with undergraduates need. Go to a college bookstore and examine a few anthropology texts. How would you characterize these? What do they tell us about the discipline?
Tremendous diversity within the anthropology disciplines and within individual sub disciplines make generalizations difficult. Their own field data is the most important type of information used by cultural anthropologists. Next comes field notes from others. Field work represents the source of data for 50 - 60 percent of anthropological articles with library and museum sources accounting for the rest. Relevant information is widely scattered. A considerable amount of information appears in foreign languages and is published abroad. Archeology, in particular, uses many items issued in a modern European language. Anthropologists are more likely to use foreign language material than most social scientists. French and German are the most important languages for published material. About 88 percent of U.S. anthropologists read a foreign language, usually French or Spanish. There has been some increase in interest in material from developing countries where bibliographic control is often poor.
Anthropologists prefer to have information arranged by place rather than subject and many information systems do not handle this well. Area studies research is often useful. Working backward from a few current citations is most common method of searching the literature. Data base searching is much less common. Younger scholars are somewhat more likely to use on-line or digitalsources. Anthropologists are traditionally print oriented. About 90 percent of the published literature is created by academics. About 40 percent of the literature cited is produced by anthropologists with 60 percent from those outside the field. Archeology, cultural and general anthropology are most likely to cite literature from within the discipline. Physical and linguistic anthropology are most likely to cite outside authors. The other disciplines used by anthropologists are:
Anthropology has been a borrower discipline more than other social science. Theory, in particular, is likely to be borrowed. Sociology strongly affects cultural and applied anthropology. Medical science affects physical anthropology.
Archeology lacks its own indexing/abstracting service. GEOREF (available on Dialog) is often useful since archeology and geology share common techniques, terminology, and research concerns.
The half-life of anthropological literature is 16 - 18 years. The modal citation is to an item about two years old. The median cite is 8 - 10 years in another study. Cultural anthropologists are more likely to use older literature. There is some evidence that anthropologists now use more recent material than before. Typically, there is a one to two-year lag from the time that a work is published before it is read and cited in print.
Monographs are more often used than serials. Sections or parts in collections are second in importance with periodicals following in importance. The American Journal of Physical Anthropology and the American Anthropologist were most often cited and the latter is most influential journal. Periodicals are increasingly important and monographs less so as time passes. Scholars in the different sub disciplines do not cite one another much. They seem to be isolated. There is some evidence of decline in interest in physical anthropology, archeology, and linguistics in the general anthropological literature. Information on techniques and methods remains popular.
Images or pictorial material is most important. There has been an increase in multiple authors, especially in biophysical anthropology and archeology. There is growing interest in film and video, especially with inexpensive cam recorders now widely available. Field notes are increasingly on video. The major distributors for anthropological film and video are AV units at: the University of California, Berkeley, Penn State and Indiana University. There is a dated Directory of Visual Anthropology.
Libraries are seen as the place to retrieve known items rather than to identify items that might be useful. ILL is heavily used. There is little browsing in the library. There is substantial use of office collections. Library services most used [ranked] are:
HRAF, Human Relations Area Files, has been a major
contributor to
library use. Established at Yale in the 1930s to facilitate global
cross
cultural research, HRAF now includes 250 Ethnic groups, 66 national
societies, 210 subjects, and about 4,000 plus sources. These
multidisciplinary files were issued on 5" x 8" paper or 3" x 5"
microfilm
cards. A digital version is also now available. Foreign language sources are
translated.
Most HRAF material has been published before. Few recent materials are
included. Coverage can be spotty and unpredictable. Selected HRAF files are
available in a digital format from SilverPlatter and HRAF itself as
eHraf
(1995- with new cultures added each year). eHraf is
much
easier to use, but remains a challenge for the undergraduate user.
Still,
eHraf is much more likely to be used than the original formats. It
makes
it
much easier for students to compare traits across cultures, and would
be the
best choice for most libraries. The Bibliography of Native North
Americans originally compiled by HRAF is now available via
EBSCOHost as a digital database. It contains about 80,000 citations to books, essays,
articles and government documents.
Library service problems [ranked]:
There is general agreement that the GN classification scheme is
inadequate. Note the LC does place material dealing with specific
places or
ethnic groups by geographic location. The indexing and abstracting
services also have access problems, particularly those only in print.
The diversity of anthropological literature is further complicated by
the need to be able to find content by place, ethnic group, time
period, method, and theoretical perspective. Terminology is often not
precise and may vary from scholar to scholar and from time to time. For
example, there are many different definitions of culture which is at
the heart of the discipline. The dramatic increase in the use of
sophisticated technology also introduces access problems since the
terminology may be new and found in another discipline.
Even a modest excavation produces far too many artifacts. Artifacts need to be presented in image format, especially since today most host countries do not allow artifacts to leave. There are many large, unpublished image collections. Time lag between recovery in field and publication has been 10 - 20 years. Digital data bases offer a vast improvement, especially if mounted on the WWW. "DigMaster" is an example of a shared, searchable data base of archaeological images in black and white or color. Quick time movies may be used to show the whole artifact. Information professionals serving anthropology will need to become familiar with the opportunities and challenges presented by the increasing availablilty of digital data from the field.
Age appropriate material is always a problem, especially for children who read above and below grade level. Video and CD-ROM material is popular. Popularizations that are accurate and appealing are needed. Interest in Native Americans and other native peoples continues with special emphasis on those who lived nearby. Greeks and Romans and other ancient civilizations remain visible in textbooks and the curriculum. DK album type books have dramatically improved the quality of non-fiction books dealing with anthropological subjects.
Find a list of anthropological topics. Which of these topics are most likely to interest the K12 teacher (consider curriculum links) in your community? Why?
Readers interested in history are often curious about everyday life as seen in artifacts. Native Americans are also popular with many adult readers. Ancient mysteries are continually popular. The location of the Ark is a good example. Biblical archaeology will be popular with many. Buried treasure is another popular topic. Popular archaeology, including how to do it, is likely to be popular in areas where artifacts are relatively easy to find.
Find a list of anthropological topics. Which of these topics are most likely to interest a typical adult in your community? Why?
Some popular material is not valid or reliable. Some New Age material that explains mysteries ancient or otherwise may be manufactured or created out of thin air. Some material with a religious orientation may be based more on philosophy than evidence.
How important is it that "ancient mystery" material be accurate? Why?
Typically, children and teens are interested in the same subjects as adults. Often, their information seeking behavior is strongly influenced by class assignments. These tend to focus on Native Americans. Self-directed reading may focus on lost civilizations and topics raised by the mass media such as underwater archaeology (when the Titanic movie was popular).
We tend to think of native Americans as the primary interest of children and teens. What other topics might interest? Why?
How would you differentiate anthropology from the other social sciences in a discussion with ordinary adults?
Which of the several problems mentioned above seem most important in considering the future of the discipline?
What might academic research librarians do to make the library more important to the anthropological scholar?
Select a popular audience of your choice. Which collections and services would be most likely to encourage use of a collection or generate reference questions?
Last major revision: August 2007.
Return to 531 page