Boas's Changes in Bodily Form: The Immigrant Study, Cranial Plasticity, and Boas's Physical Anthropology

In two recent articles, we and another set of researchers independently reanalyzed data from Franz Boas's classic study of immigrants and their descendants. Whereas we confirm Boas's overarching conclusion regarding the plasticity of cranial form, Corey Sparks and Richard Jantz argue that Boas was incorrect. Here we attempt to reconcile these apparently incompatible conclusions. We first address methodological differences between our reanalyses and suggest that (1) Sparks and Jantz posed a different set of questions than we did, and (2) their results are largely consistent with our own. We then discuss our differing understandings of Boas's original argument and of the concept of cranial plasticity. In particular, we argue that Sparks and Jantz attribute to Boas a position he explicitly rejected. When we clarify Boas's position and place the immigrant study in historical context, Sparks and Jantz's renalysis supports our conclusion that, on the whole, Boas got it right. [Keywords: Franz Boas, plasticity, anthropometry, heritability, immigrant study]     

Changing Times, Changing Faces: Franz Boas's Immigrant Study in Modern Perspective

Franz Boas's study of the changes in bodily form of descendants of immigrants has stood for over ninety years as proof of environmental influences on cranial form. Recent reanalysis of his data have shown differing interpretations of the importance of his findings. Here, we explore the historical, political, and social setting of the study that could have led Boas to overstate the importance of his findings. We also include a discussion of the issue at large with respect to the study of modern and prehistoric human variation. Given the current state of population research using craniometric data we conclude, as many of Boas's early criticism have, that while some of the changes observed by Boas have statistical credibility, they generally lack biological meaning when considered in the scope of the degree of modern human variation. [Keywords: plasticity, immigration, craniometries, cranial index, human variation]     

The First Boasian: Alfred Kroeber and Franz Boas, 1896-1905

This article reviews the interplay of the personal, institutional, and intellectual factors in the relationship between Franz Boas and Alfred Kroeber, his first important student. It focuses on their first decade, 1896-1905, a critical transitional period in the formation of American anthropology. After a consideration of their personal and familial contexts, it reviews Boas's role as a graduate professor to Kroeber, the beginning of an academic anthropology program at the University of California, Boas and Kroeber's collaborative and competitive relationship as museum curators, their diverging ethnographic strategies, Boas's editing of Kroeber's professional writings, and their disagreements over the organization of national professional societies (primarily the American Anthropological Association and the American Folklore Society). This article is a case study of the construction of anthropological traditions. [Keywords: Franz Boas, Alfred Kroeber, history of anthropology]     

Linguistic Magic Bullets in the Making of a Modernist Anthropology

This article engages current debates about concepts of culture in U.S. anthropology by examining how assumptions about language shape them. Characterizing linguistic patterns as particularly inaccessible to conscious introspection, Franz Boas suggested that culture is similarly automatic and unconscious—except for anthropologists. He used this notion in attempting to position the discipline as the obligatory passage point for academic and public debate about difference. Unfortunately, this mode of inserting linguistics in the discipline, which has long outlived Boas, reifies language ideologies by promoting simplistic models that belie the cultural complexity of human communication. By pointing to the way that recent work in linguistic anthropology has questioned key assumptions that shaped Boas's concept of culture, the article urges other anthropologists to stop asking their linguistic colleagues for magic bullets and to appreciate the critical role that examining linguistic ideologies and practices can play in discussions of the politics of culture. [Keywords: Franz Boas, culture concept, linguistic anthropology, language ideologies, scientific authority]     

Clark Wissler and the Development of Anthropology in the United States

Wissler receives scant notice today although he was a major figure in American anthropology. During the decades when the historical particularism of Franz Boas dominated American cultural anthropology, Wissler's theories provided a nomothetic alternative. His theories are in current use in various guises. The importance of Wissler has been obscured to some extent because he is often misclassified as a Boasian. However, he consciously worked outside of Boas's influence.     

Franz Boas: cultural history for the present, or obsolete natural history?

Recently, some neo-Boasian anthropologists have portrayed Boas as an anthropologist with a deep sense of history, of the individual, and of agency. Focusing on Boas's ethnographic practice rather than his theoretical and programmatic statements, I first find an 'atomistic' (opposite of holistic) ethnographer, and a deep convergence between this atomism and Linnaean-type natural history. In Foucault and Jacob's interpretation of natural history, this means studying socio-cultural phenomena through their external manifestations, and removes historicity, and even individual cultures, from Boas's ethnography. Reviewing possible counter-evidence from the holistic Boas (his work on style, meaning, the 'genius of a people,' texts, secondary explanations, and psychology), I retrieve the same natural historian, and the same atomism. All these facets of his practice thus appear as surface manifestations of this underlying épistémè , which provides a single interpretative framework making it possible to integrate most of his ethnographic work. Overall, this worldview leaves little, or no, room for individuals and their agency.     

The Passion of Franz Boas

The reputation of Franz Boas as a scientist declined in the decades after his death in 1942, but his reputation as a champion of human rights and an opponent of racism remained intact. More recently, however, some writers have questioned the sincerity, the results, and the political implications of his anthropology and his work against racism and ethnocentrism. Others have been critical of his relations with colleagues and students such as Ella Deloria and Zora Neale Hurston. In this essay I discuss some of these claims and present a more positive view. Franz Boas was passionately and consistently concerned about human rights and individual liberty, freedom of inquiry and speech, equality of opportunity, and the defeat of prejudice and chauvinism. He struggled for a lifetime to advance a science that would serve humanity, and he was as much of a humanitarian in private as he was in public. [Boas, political struggles, human relations]     

Variation among North Amerindians: analysis of Boas's anthropometric data.

In the late nineteenth century Franz Boas was responsible for assembling anthropometric data from North Amerindians. Approximately 15,000 subjects were measured, but the data have never been systematically analyzed. Here we describe our efforts to develop a computerized database from Boas's data and present the first systematic analysis of these data. In addition to a general analysis of North Amerindian anthropometric variation, we also present a more detailed analysis of anthropometric variation among tribes located in the American Northwest. In the general analysis we find that anthropometric variation is strongly patterned along geographic lines. We examine geographic and language patterning by grouping tribes by culture area and language phylum. Both have high explanatory power, culture area being the higher. The Northwest analysis shows that both language and geographic location are important in explaining anthropometric variation.     

Capitalist Philanthropy and Russian Revolutionaries: The Jesup North Pacific Expedition (1897-1902)

This review of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition, still the most important expedition in American anthropology, gives an idea of the goals and hazards of fieldwork around 1900, the pitfalls of international research, the tensions between anthropologists and host populations, the careers of early anthropologists, the role of private philanthropy, and the character of anthropology at the turn of the century. Franz Boas was the Expedition's linchpin. His organization of the Expedition, the way he handled problems, and his personal concerns reveal aspects of his view of anthropology and some of his basic attitudes.     

Samoyedic Diary: Early Years of Visual Anthropology in the Soviet Arctic

This article describes Georgii and Ekaterina Prokofiev's expedition to the Bol'shezemel'skie Nenets and their experience in filming documentary chronicles. Their records form a unique part of the visual anthropology of the Samoyedic peoples. From extant archival documents it is assumed that the chronicles were filmed with funding from the cooperation agreement that was signed by Franz Boas and Vladimir Bogoras in New York in 1928. The article offers a reconstruction of Prokofiev's fieldwork experience and his accounts of the early history of collectivization. In this regard the filmed chronicles and a collection of photos taken in the field are treated as a visual conceptualization. Available studies of visual anthropology in the USSR suggest that the documentary chronicles by the Prokofievs, made in 1929–30, are the first cinematic records to be produced by ethnographers in the Soviet Arctic.     

Boas, Darwin, science, and anthropology

This paper presents a new reading of Franz Boas's philosophy of science and his approach to the understanding of culture and behavior. It points out that his approach had important parallels with the worldview of the major figures associated with pragmatism and suggests that a similar perspective can be useful today.     

The Promise of Particularism and the Theology of Culture: Limits and Lessons of "Neo-Boasianism"

This article compares the status of "culture" as a politically engaged concept in Franz Boas's time and in our own time. Taking a Boasian approach to "neo-Boasianism," I examine the limits of this comparability in order to shed light on the nature of public culture-talk today and to identify dimensions of the Boasian concept of "culture" particularly relevant to a contemporary anthropology.     

Physical Anthropology: The Search for General Processes and Principles

Physical anthropology consists of two interdependent types of study: (1) the biological history of man and (2) general biological processes in man (such as mechanisms of evolution and growth). Popular interest may focus on the former, the fascinating story of the origin of man and of specific people, but the latter affords physical anthropology potential practical value in respect to medicine, dentistry, public health, and population policy. The study of general processes is the study of human beings in particular situations, not for what we can learn about these particular populations but for the sake of generalization about mankind anywhere in comparable situations. This is, of course, the purpose of experimental science in general, but in anthropology the method is usually comparative. Long ago the study of the growth of the two sexes and of children in different countries was started on a comparative basis as was the study of the so-called secular change in adult stature. By 1911 Franz Boas had compared the changes in stature and head form of children of several different immigrant groups in the United States. There have since been comparative studies of the amount and distribution of body fat (but not yet adequate comparative measurements of the relation of tissue components to diet and to diseases). Demographic patterns, inbreeding, outbreeding, and their effects are other general problems. The Human Adaptability Project of the International Biological Program promises studies of human response to heat, cold, altitude, and other conditions on a wide international basis. If supported, these could turn physical anthropology's search in a useful direction. The functional biology of people of even out-of-the-way communities will be compared with each other. These studies can yield general statements concerning human response to types of ecological situation including such sociocultural conditions as those of hunting-gathering tribes and urban slums.     

A Gifted Amateur: The Case of George Washington Ellis

George Washington Ellis published Negro Culture in West Africa in 1914 in response to the social gospel prophets' racist and stereotypical perspectives of West Africa and Africans. In so doing. Ellis attempted to shift the discourse from one that emphasized African barbarism to one that repudiated the idea of African inferiority. Unwittingly, however, Ellis preached a brand of romantic racialism—a benign doctrine that was commonplace in the racial discourse of African American elites at the Turn of the Century. Asa consequence, his loyalties were divided between 19th-century ethnological science and the "new ethnology" of Franz Boas. [Keywords: George Washington Ellis, history of racism, antiracism, African American anthropology, social gospel prophets]     

Jews, Multiculturalism, and Boasian Anthropology

Standard histories of American anthropology have downplayed the preponderance of Jewish intellectuals in the early years of Boasian anthropology and the Jewish identities of later anthropologists. Jewish histories, however, foreground the roles and deeds of Jews. This essay brings together these various discourses for a new generation of American anthropologists, especially those concerned with turning multiculturalist theories into agendas for activism. Although Boas's anthropology was apolitical in terms of theory, in message and purpose it was an antiracist science.     

Some Implications of Clark Wissler's Race Theory

A recent attempt to place the name of Clark Wissler in a central position in the history of anthropology ignores his blatant racism. Wissler's racism was evident not only in scholarly and popular circles, but, as well, was employed by the United States government to give ‘scientific’ status to its Immigration Act of 1924. The Act favoured the inflow of Northwest Europeans at the expense of Eastern European Jews and other groups who had been immigrating in massive numbers, and whose presence had become increasingly unwelcome. It was used by the Nazi propaganda machine to justify German anti-Semitism in 1933 and thereafter, and by the United States Department of State to turn away the eventual victims of Nazi genocide. Wissler thus provides a profound scholarly and human contrast to Franz Boas, who publicly deplored racism and immigration restriction. Boas' stand as a ‘citizen-scientist’ partly accounts for his under-evaluation by later anthropologists, most recently by Derek Freeman in his Margaret Mead and Samoa.     

A Cannibal in the National Museum: The Early Career of Franz Boas in America

Franz Boas spent several weeks at Fort Rupert, British Columbia, at the end of 1894, when he saw the Kwakiutl hamatsa ritual in situ for the first time. Soon after his return east Boas posed for a series of photographs in the U.S. National Museum for a diorama of the hamatsa dance. These photographs, now published for the first time, are a sharp reminder of Boas' constant (and sometimes forced) collaboration with the limited number of anthropological institutions in America at the end of the century, and of his personal difficulties in establishing himself professionally in America.     

Claude Lévi-Strauss Meets Alexander Goldenweiser: Boasian Anthropology and the Study of Totemism

Contrary to some recent overviews of the "Boas school" (e.g., by Marvin Harris and Derek Freeman), Boasian anthropology was far from unified even on a single subject: totemism. Although more recent thought on this subject stems from Lévi-Strauss, Alexander Goldenweiser's corpus on totemism anticipates Lévi-Strauss's formulations. This corpus included ideas that altered in the course of Goldenweiser's career, and these alterations were differently received by his "Boasian" contemporaries. It seems likely—though details of the process are unclear—that Goldenweiser's ideas "diffused" to Lévi-Strauss.     

How "Caucasoids" got such big crania and why they shrank. From Morton to Rushton

In the 19th century measurements of cranial capacity by Morton and others supported a "Caucasoid>Mongoloid>Negroid" hierarchy of intelligence. This continued through most of the 20th century but was challenged by a nonhierarchical view originating with Boas. Beginning in the 1980s Rushton correlated cranial and IQ measurements and presented a hierarchy with "Mongoloids" at the top. Each of these periods relates to its social context: the 19th-century hierarchy paralleled the height of European world domination; the nonhierarchy of the 20th century reflected world wars, worldwide depression, and the breakup of empires; the "Mongoloid>Caucasoid>Negroid" hierarchy followed the economic success of several Asian nations. Morton's cranial ranking was the result of his sampling error and his acceptance of the hierarchical thinking of his time. But how is it possible for Rushton to support the M>C>N ordering while using the data of several anthropologists who have rejected racial hierarchies on empirical grounds? The answer to this question involves a critique of Rushton's use of the race concept, his aggregation of diverse populations into three traditional races, his claim to explain differences in "cultural achievements" on the basis of variation in brain size, and a number of other problems. The study concludes by noting that the major consequence of these hierarchies is the apparent justification for the exploitation of those at the bottom.     

How It Came to Be: Carl O. Sauer, Franz Boas, and the Meaning of Anthropogeography

How It Came to Be: Carl O. Sauer, Franz Boas, and the Meaning of Anthropogeography. William W. Speth. Ellensburg, WA: Ephemera Press. 268 pp.