학자들과 이론 역사

 

Anthropologists and Theoretical History

초기 문화 연구 학문들

 Early Cultural Studies

Herodotus

Bust of Herodotus

Herodotus can be considered one of the first anthropologists, and his work can be considered some of the first anthropological studies. He “sought to understand other people and cultures by traveling far and wide.” ^[6] Even though he did not practice anthropology like it is practiced today, he created a rather unbiased, truthful recording of other cultures’ legends and lifestyles by using second-hand and third-hand accounts relating to his primary subjects.

“Herodotus of Halicarnassus here displays his inquiry, so that human achievements may not become forgotten in time, and great and marvelous deeds- some displayed by Greeks, some by barbarians- may not be without their glory.” –Opening sentence, The Histories, Herodotus

In his nine scrolls known as The Histories, written in the later period of his life (430 BCE), Herodotus describes the conflict between the Greeks and the Persians, but he often digresses from his topic to describe what he had learned through interviews of the Scythians, who lived near the Black Sea. He learned about and recounted information on how the Scythians lived, and he also learned about nomads who lived further north than the Scythians. Even though the information he recounts was translated many times before transcribed, artifacts similar to the ones he describes have been found in modern excavations in Russia and Kazakhstan.

기독교 카톨릭 탁발승 피안 드 카프리네의 존

Friar John of Pian de Caprine

The Journey of Friar John of Pian de Caprine to the Court of Kuyuk Khan, 1245-1247, is another very early cultural anthropological study. Written by Friar John of Pian de Caprine, this is one of the most descriptive, in-detail accounts of Mongols in the thirteenth century. Friar John had been sent by Pope Innocent IV to the Court of Kuyuk Khan, to witness the swearing in of a new Khan. Despite his Christian background, Friar John’s description of the Mongols is surprisingly unbiased.^[7]

 

인류학/문화인류학 학문 발전사

The Development of the Discipline

에드워드 비 타일러:

문화/종교 상대주의.

관찰 자료 수집 분석 패턴 평가

In 1861, Edward Burnett Tylor wrote what was arguably the first cultural anthropology book, Anahuac: Or Mexico and the Mexicans, Ancient and Modern (fulltext). This book reviewed Tylor’s recent trip to Mexico and the surrounding areas. The stories within the book demonstrated the many articulate views of the modern European culture compared to the diverse cultures of the county of Mexico. The book showed the first integration of education and cultural relativism. Tylor used what he understood about the world he knew, and compared it closely to what he encountered in Mexico. His most common references were to the distinct amounts of relics, both artistic and economical, which helped to depict the culture of the Mexican nation. Although it was a huge change in scenery for Tylor, the experience was well documented and his views kept the modern idea in mind about seeing a different culture in their eyes versus his own. Modern day examples of cultures valuing artistic "relics" can be seen in many many Western cultures today. From the importance that the Western Washington University radio station, KUGS places on their valuable antique records to the many amazing works of art preserved in the Louvre Art Museum in Paris, France. Art preservation is a huge part of culture today.

Armchair Anthropology and E.B. Tylor Arm chair anthropology: Anthropologists worked with studies and information collected by others, like missionaries, explorers, and colonial officials. They did not actually travel and collect their own data. Instead they used the data collected by others to propose theories about other cultures. This type of anthropology was coined "armchair anthropology." The theories were mainly focused on primitive society. An arm chair anthropologist in today's terms would not be much of an anthropologist, they are simply someone who takes others observations and views and forms an opinion from that. They usually are basing their opinions on a biased observation of the culture. This is to say that a missionary will give a description of the people dramatically different than the observations taken from a colonialist.

After Edward Burnett Tylor wrote Anahuac: Or Mexico and the Mexicans, Ancient and Modern, he never really traveled again, and thus became an armchair anthropologist. In 1871, he wrote what is considered his most important work, Primitive Culture. In this two volume work, Tylor develops an evolutionary culture theory, where cultures moved from one stage to another (from primitive to modern).

 

인류학에 초창기 영향준 인물들

 

Early influential personalities

There were many people that contributed to the work of early anthropology. In the United States there was Lewis Henry Morgan and Franz BoasBoas, while in the UK, there was Edward Burnett Tylor and James George Frazer. In France, two major contributors were Marcel Mauss and Claude Lévi-Strauss. These people all helped develop cultural anthropology as we know it today. More information on major contributors is available below.

 

간략한 역사 개관

 A brief history

민속지학적 현장조사 접근: 영국의 에드워드 타일러와 제임스 프레이저

Modern cultural anthropology has its origins in, and developed in reaction to, 19th century "ethnology", which involves the organized comparison of human societies. Scholars like E.B. Tylor and J.G. Frazer in England worked mostly with materials collected by others – usually missionaries, traders, explorers, or colonial officials – this earned them their current sobriquet of "arm-chair anthropologists".

Many people found it very interesting how people living in different places often had similar beliefs and customs

확산론ㅁ적 접근: 스미스 몰건

Ethnologists had a special interest in why people living in different parts of the world often had similar beliefs and practices. In addressing this question, ethnologists in the 19th century divided into two schools of thought. Some, like Grafton Elliot Smith, argued that different groups must somehow have learned from one another, however indirectly; in other words, they argued that cultural traits spread from one place to another, or "diffused". This way of thinking could be better understood in the context of the school playground; everyone wants to be like the "cool" kid-they see what he has and they want it. This idea can be expanded to an entire culture, people see another group of people doing something better than them, and so they learn the new, more effective way of living.

Other ethnologists argued that different groups had the capability of inventing similar beliefs and practices independently. Some of those who advocated "independent invention", like Morgan, additionally supposed that similarities meant that different groups had passed through the same stages of cultural evolution. Morgan, in particular, acknowledged that certain forms of society and culture could not possibly have arisen before others. For example, industrial farming could have been invented before simple farming, and metallurgy could have developed without previous non-smelting processes involving metals (such as simple ground collection or mining). Morgan, like other 19th century social evolutionists, believed there was a more or less orderly progression from the primitive to the civilized.

문화적응적 접근: 줄리언 스티워드

20th century anthropologists largely reject the notion that all human societies must pass through the same stages in the same order, on the grounds that such a notion does not fit the empirical facts. Some 20th century ethnologists, like Julian Steward, have instead argued that such similarities reflected similar adaptations to similar environments.

구조주의적 접근: 크라우데 레비 스트로 뒤르껭

Others, such as Claude Lévi-Strauss (who was influenced both by American cultural anthropology and by French Durkheimian sociology), have argued that apparent patterns of development reflect fundamental similarities in the structure of human thought (see structuralism). By the mid-20th century, the number of examples of people skipping stages, such as going from hunter-gatherers to post-industrial service occupations in one generation, were so numerous that 19th century evolutionism was effectively disproved.^[1]

In the 20th century most cultural (and social) anthropologists turned to the crafting of ethnographies. An ethnography is a piece of writing about a people, at a particular place and time. Typically, the anthropologist actually lives among another society for a considerable period of time, simultaneously participating in and observing the social and cultural life of the group. This way of studying a culture is much more of an unbiased view of the culture. As apposed to the previous method of the arm chair anthropologists, these scholars are there interacting with the people. As a way of learning about a culture these ethnographies are a great resource.

However, any number of other ethnographic techniques have resulted in ethnographic writing or details being preserved, as cultural anthropologists also curate materials, spend long hours in libraries, churches and schools poring over records, investigate graveyards, and decipher ancient scripts. A typical ethnography will also include information about physical geography, climate and habitat. It is meant to be a holistic piece of writing about the people in question, and today often includes the longest possible timeline of past events that the ethnographer can obtain through primary and secondary research.

기능주의 접근: 매리놉스키 보어스 라드크리프 브라운

w:Bronisław Malinowski (who conducted fieldwork in the Trobriand Islands and taught in England) developed this method, and Franz Boas (who conducted fieldwork in Baffin Island and taught in the United States) promoted it. Boas's students drew on his conception of culture and cultural relativism to develop cultural anthropology in the United States. Simultaneously, Malinowski and A.R. Radcliffe Brown´s students were developing social anthropology in the United Kingdom. Whereas cultural anthropology focused on symbols and values, social anthropology focused on social groups and institutions. Today socio-cultural anthropologists attend to all these elements.

Although 19th century ethnologists saw "diffusion" and "independent invention" as mutually exclusive and competing theories, most ethnographers quickly reached a consensus that both processes occur, and that both can plausibly account for cross-cultural similarities. But these ethnographers pointed out the superficiality of many such similarities, and that even traits that spread through diffusion often changed their meaning and functions as they moved from one society to another.

Accordingly, these anthropologists showed less interest in comparing cultures, generalizing about human nature, or discovering universal laws of cultural development, than in understanding particular cultures in those cultures' own terms. Such ethnographers and their students promoted the idea of "cultural relativism", the view that one can only understand another person's beliefs and behaviors in the context of the culture in which he or she lived.

In the early 20th century socio-cultural anthropology developed in different forms in Europe and in the United States. European "social anthropologists" focused on observed social behaviors and on "social structure", that is, on relationships among social roles (e.g. husband and wife, or parent and child) and social institutions (e.g. religion, economy, and politics).

American "cultural anthropologists" focused on the ways people expressed their view of themselves and their world, especially in symbolic forms (such as art and myths). These two approaches frequently converged (kinship, for example, and leadership function both as symbolic systems and as social institutions), and generally complemented one another. Today almost all socio-cultural anthropologists refer to the work of both sets of predecessors, and have an equal interest in what people do and in what people say.

현대 지역문화 접근: 클리포드 울프 등

Today ethnography continues to dominate socio-cultural anthropology. Nevertheless, many contemporary socio-cultural anthropologists have rejected earlier models of ethnography which they claim treated local cultures as bounded and isolated. These anthropologists continue to concern themselves with the distinct ways people in different locales experience and understand their lives, but they often argue that one cannot understand these particular ways of life solely from a local perspective; they instead combine a focus on the local with an effort to grasp larger political, economic, and cultural frameworks that impact local lived realities. Notable proponents of this approach include Arjun Appadurai, James Clifford, George Marcus, Sidney Mintz, Michael Taussig and Eric Wolf.

A growing trend in anthropological research and analysis seems to be the use of multi-sited ethnography, discussed in George Marcus's article "Ethnography In/Of the World System: the Emergence of Multi-Sited Ethnography"]. Looking at culture as embedded in macro-constructions of a global social order, multi-sited ethnography uses traditional methodology in various locations both spatially and temporally. Through this methodology greater insight can be gained when examining the impact of world-systems on local and global communities.

Also emerging in multi-sited ethnography are greater interdisciplinary approaches to fieldwork, bringing in methods from cultural studies, media studies, science and technology studies, and others. In multi-sited ethnography research tracks a subject across spatial and temporal boundaries. For example, a multi-sited ethnography may follow a "thing," such as a particular commodity, as it transfers through the networks of global capitalism.

Multi-sited ethnography may also follow ethnic groups in diaspora, stories or rumours that appear in multiple locations and in multiple time periods, metaphors that appear in multiple ethnographic locations, or the biographies of individual people or groups as they move through space and time. It may also follow conflicts that transcend boundaries. Multi-sited ethnographies, such as Nancy Scheper-Hughes's ethnography of the international black market for the trade of human organs. In this research she follows organs as they transfer through various legal and illegal networks of capitalism, as well as the rumours and urban legends that circulate in impoverished communities about child kidnapping and organ theft.

Sociocultural anthropologists have increasingly turned their investigative eye on to "Western" culture. For example, Philippe Bourgois won the Margaret Mead Award in 1997 for In Search of Respect, a study of the entrepreneurs in a Harlem crack-den. Also growing more popular are ethnographies of professional communities, such as laboratory researchers, Wall Street investors, law firms, or IT computer employees.^[2]

 

역사적으로 본

문화 이론가들 Historic Cultural Anthropologists

E. B. Tylor

에드워드 타일러

종교와 문화의 상대성과 발전 

Edward Burnett Tylor

Sir Edward Burnett Tylor (1832-1917), was born in Camberwell, London, England in 1832. He graduated from Grove House High School but never received a university degree due to the death of his parents. Following their death Tylor started having symptoms of tuberculosis. He decided to leave England and travel to Central America in search for a warmer climate. This is where he first started his research on anthropology. He is considered one of the early proponents of cultural evolutionism in Anthropology.

His first book, aptly titled Anthropology (1881), is considered fairly modern in its cultural concepts and theories. In 1883, Tylor joined the University Museum at Oxford and became a professor of Anthropology from 1896 to 1909. Most of Tylor's work involved the primitive culture and the minds of the people, particularly animism. Animism is a philosophical, religious or spiritual idea that souls or spirits exist not only in humans and animals but also in plants, rocks and natural phenomena. His work has been the foundation of many universities' Anthropological major curriculum. Some of his later works include: Researches Into the Early History of Mankind (1865)and Anahuac (1861). His most important work, "Primitive Culture" (1871), which was partially influenced by Darwin’s theory of biological evolution. It developed the theory of an evolutionary, progressive relationship from primitive to modern cultures. It did this by defining "culture or civilization" as "that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, moral, law, costom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society". This definition encouraged the idea that even primtives possessed capabilities ad habits that merited respect. Primitive stereotypes were thus changed.^[3] During his travels, he met a man named Henry Christy, who was also a Quaker interested in ethnology and archaeology, which influenced Tylor's interest in these areas.

Lewis Henry Morgan

루이스 몰건

문화의 차이 

Lewis Henry Morgan

Lewis Henry Morgan was born on November 21, 1818 near Aurora, New York. He graduated from Union College in Schenectady in 1840 and became an attorney by profession. Later in his profession he studied the Iroquois people of western New York and gathered extesive data about the Iroquois Confederation.

His book “League of the Ho-dé-no-sau-nee, or Iroquois” (1851) is considered one of the earliest objective ethnographic works of native peoples. From the book, one of the most important pioneering achievements of the first order is the study of kinship systems. What he found was that the Seneca designate their kin in a manner different from that of the Western culture. Unlike the Western culture, they merge collateral relatives, such as cousins, nieces, and aunts, into the direct line, like fathers, sisters, and daughters.

프랜즈 보어스

문화의 역사적 특수성/상대성, 문화 교육과 습득

Franz Boas

Franz Boas

Franz Boas, known as the Father of American Anthropology, was born in Minden, Germany in 1858. He earned a Ph.D in physics with a minor in geography at the University of Kiel in 1881 and later became a professor and founded the first department of anthropology in the United States at Columbia University. ^[4]

Boas is well known for his studies on the Native population in Northern Vancouver and British Colombia, Canada. Influenced by the writings of Charles Darwin, Boas developed the theory of cultural relativism, devoting much of his life’s work to discrediting the importance of racial distinction in the field. At a time when armchair anthropology and racial prejudices were rampant, Boas emphasized the importance of impartial data, the use of the scientific method in his research, and rejected the idea of Western civilization’s supposed “cultural superiority.” Boas gave modern anthropology its rigorous scientific methodology, patterned after the natural sciences. He also originated the notion of "culture" as learned behaviors. His emphasis on research first, followed by generalizations, emphasized the creation of grand theories (which were only after tested through field work) [Link: Boas]. Boas was truly the first person to develop an ethnography which is a descriptive account of anthropological studies. A few of Boas’ students include anthropologists Alfred L. Kroeber, Margaret Mead, Jules Henry, and Ashley Montagu. Boas became Professor Emeritus in 1937, after serving over 40 years as Professor at Columbia University. He died in 1942.

룻 베네딕트

문화 패턴 

Ruth Benedict

Ruth Benedict was and American anthropologist whose work was greatly influenced by her mentor and teacher Franz Boas, the father of American anthropology. She was born in New York City on June 5, 1887 and died September 17, 1949. She graduated from Vassar College in 1909 and entered graduate studies at Columbia University in 1919, studying under Franz Boas and receiving her PhD in 1923. The central idea of her book Patterns of Culture (1934), which was translated into fourteen different languages and used in universities for many years, is that each culture chooses from the “great arc of human personalities” but only dominant traits emerge in people’s characters and the overall character of society. Ruth Benedict expressed the idea that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny which holds that the growth or change of the individual is a reflection of the growth or change of the species. She desired to show that each culture had its own moral imperatives that could be understood only if one studied that culture as a whole. Benedict conducted fieldwork in New Mexico with the Native American Pueblo people and used data from Franz Boas and other colleagues like Margaret Mead to supplement her research.

마거릿 미드

심리학적 사회적 문화 교육과 적응, 실증적 문화 비교

Margaret Mead

Margaret Mead

Margaret Mead (1901-1979) was the oldest of five until one of her younger sisters died at just nine months of age. Mead was born on December 16 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1901. After graduating from Barnard College, she received her Ph.D. from Columbia University³. It was there where she met her greatest influences, anthropologists Ruth Benedict and Franz Boas. She was married three times in her life, her first marriage with Luther Sheeleigh Cressman, an archeologist. Her third and longest-lasting marriage (1936–1950) was to the British Anthropologist Gregory Bateson with whom she had a daughter, Mary Catherine Bateson, who would also become an anthropologist. Margaret Mead focused mainly on child-rearing and personality traits in Samoa, New Guinea, and Bali. It was here she was able to take a positivist method to her research. Mead was also popular to mass media as a speaker and writer of her work.

In the 1930’s Margaret Mead used a method called controlled comparison, or taking hypotheses to different cultural settings. Each setting would match up to a separate experiment. This allowed anthropologists, such as Mead, to study human life by participant-observation instead of an artificial lab setting. Mead used this method when she studied four different societies in an attempt to discover the range and causes of gender role. It is still used today. Margaret Mead was known for introducing radical proposals and being an activist. one of her most memorable stances on issues was her outspoken advocacy on birth control.From her findings she was able to produce many ethnographic writings, such as Coming of Age in Samoa (1928) and Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies (1935)³.

마빈 해리스

물질주의적 이념/문화 특성 

Marvin Harris

Marvin Harris (1927-2001), was born on August 18, 1927 in Brooklyn, New York. After joined the U.S. Army in World War II then attended school at Columbia University. After graduating, Harris became an assistant professor at Columbia University. His main focus of study was ideological features of culture. Later Harris did fieldwork in Mozambique in 1957 and started focusing more on behavioral aspects. He is also well known for his explanation on Indian cultures ‘sacred cows’. Harris did most of his fieldwork in Brazil, Mozambique, India, and Ecuador.

Harris was an American Anthropologist known for his writing and influence on cultural materialism. Harris’ studies were mostly based on Latin America and Brazil. Harris used Karl Marx and Malthus’s information to help form his own opinions and ideas. Harris had over 16 books published. After Harris’ publication, The Rise of Anthropological Theory, the American Anthropological Association had lots of talk and criticism over his theory. Harris’ work has helped anthropologists learn and gain more information about his studies.

내플리언 책넌

현장 참여, 사회생물적, 환경적 참여

Napoleon Chagnon

Yanomami [2] Children

Napoleon Chagnon was born in 1938 in Port Austin, Michigan. He is an American anthropologist who is best known for his ethnographic work with the Yanomamö tribe of the Amazon between Venezuela and Brazil. He was a major player in developing to the evolutionary theory of cultural anthropology. He first documented the Yanomami tribe as savages who treated him very badly, but as time progressed he gained the nickname of Shaki, meaning "pesky bee".

Through his research of the Yanomamö people, Chagnon gained information about the genealogies of these people in order to find out who was married, who was related, and cooperation and settlement pattern history. Through this research he was a pioneer in the fields of sociobiology and human behavioral ecology. He also pioneered in visual anthropology, by creating documentaries about the Yanomamö people and their society. His works include: The Yanomamo Series, in collaboration with Tim Asch, including 22 separate films on the Yanomamo Culture, such as The Ax Fight (1975), Children's Magical Death (1974), Magical Death (1988), A Man Called Bee: A Study of the Yanomamo (1974), Yanomamo Of the Orinoco (1987). He has also written a few books on the Yanomamö culture: Yanomamö: The Fierce People(1968), Chagnon, N. (1974), written at New York, Studying the Yanomamö, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Yanomamo - The Last Days Of Eden, 1992.

Although much of his work was meant to document the growing of a culture, he has also been credited as a destroyer of the culture. According to Darkness in El Dorado, by Patrick Tierney, Chagnon aided the spreading of measles to the Yanomamo people. All claims by Tierney have been refuted, but it is a fact that due to exposure to other outside cultures, the people of this tribe were exposed to diseases that their bodies could not fight. Chagnon was not only known for his ethnography but he was also well known for criticism and controversy about his work and opinions.

레이 버드윗셀

몸짓 언어 소통속에 나타난 문화

Ray Birdwhistell

Ray L. Birdwhistell born in 1918 was raised alongside his brother in Ohio. He attended Fostoria High School where he was very involved with athletics, debate team, journalism, and a history club. He later graduated in 1936 in a class of approximately 16 students. After high school, Birdwhistell furthered his education at the University of Chicago where he earned his Ph.D. in anthropology. Birdwhistell then went on to teach at the University of Toronto, University of Louisville, and the University of Buffalo. He then became a professor at the University of Pennsylvania where he pursued his interest in nonverbal communication and kinesics.

Birdwhistell found most of his studies through observing people interactions in films. His interest in kinesics led him to study the way people used their bodies or bodily gestures to communicate nonverbally. His observations concluded that people use eye movement, facial ｅxpressions, and their chest to convey information. After acquiring this knowledge of nonverbal communication, Birdwhistell published two books; Introduction to Kinesics and Kinesics and Context.

Ray Birdwhitstell was an American Anthropologist, best known for his pioneering studies into the field of kinesics (the study of gesture posture and bodily motion as it relates to nonverbal communication). Born in Ohio in 1918, he got his Ph.D. in Anthroplogy at the University of Chicago. He later went on to teach at the Universities of Toronto, Louisville, and Buffalo. Birdhitsell released two texts on Kinesics, Introduction to Kinesics, and Kinesics in context. Although "Kinesics in Context" was better known. Birdwhitsell died in 1994.(2)

줄리언 스티워드

문화에서 현대화 비교 분석

Julian Steward

Unidentified Native Man (Carrier Indian) (possibly Steward's informant, Chief Louis Billy Prince) and Julian Steward, 1940

Julian Steward was born on January 31, 1902 in Washington D.C. He was raised in a Christian Science household, and therefore was discouraged from practicing sciences at home. He didn't discover his love for the sciences until he was to attend boarding school in Owens Valley, California, at the edge of the Great Basin. As an undergraduate, Steward studied for a year at Berkeley under Alfred Kroeber and Robert Lowie, after which he transferred to Cornell University, from which he graduated in 1925 with a B.Sc. in Zoology. Steward graduated from Cornell in 1925 and went back to Berkeley to pursue graduate work. Steward received his Ph. D. degree in Anthropology in 1929 with a thesis entitled The Ceremonial Buffoon of the American Indian, a Study of Ritualized Clowning and Role Reversals. Steward went on to establish an anthropology department at the University of Michigan, where he taught until 1930. The department later gained notoriety from the appointment and guidance of Leslie White, with whose model of "universal" cultural evolution Steward disagreed. In 1930, Steward moved to the University of Utah, which appealed to Steward for its proximity to the Sierra Nevadas, and nearby archaeological fieldwork opportunities in California, Nevada, Idaho, and Oregon.Steward's career reached its apogee in 1946 when he took up the chair of the anthropology department at Columbia University - the center of anthropology in the United States. At this time, Columbia saw an influx of World War II veterans who were attending school thanks to the GI Bill. Steward quickly developed a coterie of students who would go on to have enormous influence in the history of anthropology, including Sidney Mintz, Eric Wolf, Roy Rappaport, Stanley Diamond, Robert Manners, Morton Fried, Robert F. Murphy, and influenced other scholars such as Marvin Harris. Many of these students participated in the Puerto Rico Project, yet another large-scale group research study that focused on modernization in Puerto Rico.Steward left Columbia for the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where he continued to teach until his retirement in 1968. There he undertook yet another large-scale study, a comparative analysis of modernization in eleven third world societies. The results of this research were published in three volumes entitled Contemporary Change in Traditional Societies. Steward died in 1972.

While Julian Steward was a famous anthropologist for many reasons, one of which by being a professor of such high caliber and his ability to produce such a high class of scholars. In addition to his role as a teacher and administrator, Steward is most remembered for his method and theory of cultural ecology. During the first three decades of the twentieth century, American anthropology was suspicious of generalizations and often unwilling to draw broader conclusions from the meticulously detailed monographs that anthropologists produced. Steward is notable for moving anthropology away from this more particularist approach and developing a more nomothetic, social-scientific direction. His theory of "multilinear" cultural evolution examined the way in which societies adapted to their environment. This approach was more nuanced than Leslie White's theory of "universal evolution," which was influenced by thinkers such as Herbert Spencer. Steward's interest in the evolution of society also led him to examine processes of modernization. He was one of the first anthropologists to examine the way in which national and local levels of society were related to one another. He questioned the possibility creating a social theory which encompassed the entire evolution of humanity; yet, he also argued that anthropologists are not limited to description of specific, existing cultures. Steward believed it is possible to create theories analyzing typical, common culture, representative of specific eras or regions. As the decisive factors determining the development of a given culture, he pointed to technology and economics, while noting that there are secondary factors, such as political systems, ideologies, and religions. These factors push the evolution of a given society in several directions at the same time.

폴 파머

건강과 치유, 실용적 결속

Paul Farmer

A quite serious looking Paul Farmer.

Paul Farmer is a medical anthropologist as well as a medical doctor. He was born in 1959 and began working to provide health care to the poor populations while still in graduate school at Harvard. After graduating in 1990, he continued to work to provide health to the poor populations around the world. He specialized in infectious disease while in school and today focuses on those that disproportionately affect the poor, such as tuberculosis. Farmer has been awarded several honors; including the Conrad N. Hilton Humanitarian Prize, American Medical Association's International Physician Award, and the 2007 Austin College Leadership Award. Back in 1987, Farmer helped put together a nonprofit called Partners in Health, whose mission is both medical and moral. Now, the group treats 1,000 patients daily for free in the Haitian countryside. The group also works to cure drug-resistant tuberculosis among prisoners in Siberia and in the slums of Lima and Peru. Farmer has devoted his life to providing medical services to the underprivileged. He uses his anthropological knowledge and ethnographic analysis to create sustainable and practical health care services for those in need. He works to offset the negative effects in those societies caused by social and structural violence. Farmer is well known for the concept of "pragmatic solidarity", the idea of working to meet the needs of the victims while advocating for positive social change.

References

<2.http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/information/biography/abcde/birdwhistell_ray.html>

• 3. Del Monte, Kathleen, Karen Bachman, Catherine Klein, and Bridgette McCorp. "Margaret Mead." Celebrating Women Anthropologists. 26 June 1999. 9 Mar. 2009 <http://anthropology.usf.edu/women/>.

4. Absolute Astronomy. "Ray Birdwhistell" 9 Mar. 2009 <http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Ray_Birdwhistell>
5. NNDB: Tracking the Entire World. "Franz Boas." <http://www.nndb.com/people/861/000097570/>

제 2부

인류학에서 문화 연구 방법

이 글도 Wikibooks에서 일부 번역

차례  Contents 1 Origins of Ethnography 1.1 Ethnographic Analogy 1.2 Effect of Capitalism and Colonialism 1.3 Human Cultural Variation 1.4 The Biology of Human Variation 2 Fieldwork Methods 2.1 Observational Methods 2.2 Interviews and Questionnaires 2.3 Participant Observation 2.4 Reflexivity 2.5 Life Histories 2.6 Participatory Approach 2.6.1 Participatory Action Research 2.6.2 Philippe Bourgois in East Harlem 3 Types of Analysis 3.1 Qualitative vs. Quantitative Analysis 3.2 Positivist Approach 3.3 Ethnographic Analysis 3.4 Domain analysis 3.5 Taxonomic Analysis 4 References

민속지학의 기원

Origins of Ethnography

The route of first voyage of Columbus in the Caribbean.

Ethnography is a qualitative research method used in social sciences like Anthropology where researchers immerse themselves in other cultures for the purpose of recording information about their lifestyle for comparative research. Originally Anthropology was thought of as a science studying the "savage slot". This meant that Anthropologists researched societies that had either already or soon would become dominated territories within the European Empire. Recording the lives and traditions of these so called savage people was beneficial to the people conquering them, such as, Christopher Columbus when he explored and conquered Hispaniola in the name of Spain. This aided them in conquering the savages because the conquistadors could more efficiently assimilate or eradicate the indigenous population. While unethical because they were only used as fuel for slaughter and slavery, these early documentations of human culture were integral to the beginnings of anthropology as we know it today.

민속지적 분석

Ethnographic Analogy

Here we see an old pick, not much different from those used today

We can infer the use of an ancient tool by seeing how similar-looking tools are used in existing or recent societies. By analogy we can hypothesize the same use for the old tool. Ethnographic Analogy is essentially interpreting archaeological data through the observation of analogous activities in existing societies.

자본주의와 식민주의의 효과

Effect of Capitalism and Colonialism

While crews were out exploring trade routes and territories, and conquering people, mainland Europe developed a new way to think about the world economically. Replacing mercantilism, which is the idea that there is a set amount of wealth in the world and one nation's gain must come at the loss of another, capitalism facilitates the belief that new wealth can be created through innovation and competition. Capitalism by definition is an economic system dominated by the supply-demand price mechanism called the market. Simply put, it is the idea that the world is a market and everything within the world, has or should have, its price. In response to that market and in service of it, an entire way of life grew and grew and changed the face of Europe as well as many other regions.

The birth of capitalism brought forth the need of a market and a new thought process to rule the new world, one which was very different from the hunter-gatherer lifestyle so common among indigenous peoples throughout other non-European places. Reducing the human life form to a price of how much labor can be produced from their commoditized life. Other cultures were forced into colonialism by European imperialists.

Colonialism refers to a social system in which political conquest by one society of another leads to cultural domination with enforced social change. While some cultures embraced the Colonialists empirical trade patterns,many indigenous peoples violently rebelled and attempted to regain their cultural independence and economic autonomy. Despite their best efforts to repel the colonialists and their economic imperialism, the indigenous peoples were unable to combat against the Europeans and their guns, deception, and disease. A great example of this happening is the way that Americans killed the natives and forced them onto reservations, even though the tried to control the land that they have had for generations, they were no match for the Europeans.

인간 문화 변동 /변이/변화

Human Cultural Variation

Even with all the trauma of colonization and capitalism, populations still had the willpower to grow and survive. After assimilation[1] or displacement a tribe or band did not stop in its cultural evolution. A defining characteristic of culture is to adapt to change. As more and more cultures divided and meshed together an outstanding number of subtle differences can be seen. one of man's greatest past-times is classifying things and ideas, and now with all this wide variety of types of cultures of the world, a broad way of lumping societies together based on how they are alike and different. These categories are called typologies.

The evolutionary typology has much to do with the idea of uni-lineal cultural evolution, a nineteenth century theory that proposed that all cultures are thought to pass through or they die off, much like biological natural selection. on the opposite thought, the social structural typology states that some cultures are barbaric, and some were not, and that's how they were. The only thing that changed much about them was their leaders and how power was divided among their group.

인간 변동/변화 생물학

 The Biology of Human Variation

Map of indigenous skin color distribution in the world based on Von Luschan's chromatic scale.

The biological variations between humans are summarized in the evolutionary theories of macroevolution and microevolution. Macroevolution is the study of the emergence of new species and the diversification of species over millions of years, while microevolution is the concentration of study of evolutionary changes that occur in a given species over a few generations. A species is a population of organisms that can interbreed successfully and produce viable offspring. A cline is a genetic variation between populations of species that are reproductively isolated (such as skin color variation in humans). Human skin color variation is a selective adaptation that relates to the populations' proximity to the equator. Populations of humans in equatorial regions have selective advantages because of their darker skin pigmentation and populations in more northern environments have less selective pressure to evolve darker pigmentation and have lighter skin. Other clines include differences in stature and hair type. Because of these differences within the human species, there is the idea that there are different races, which leads into racism. Although there is no biological support for race, culture has supported the ideas of race and racism beginning with the far-reaching exploration of sea-faring ships, which allowed landing parties to miss the range of gradual clinal variation visible when traveling by land.

Biological anthropologist, Frank Livingstone declared that, "There are no races, there are only clines." Clinal variation explains why people who want to use the term "race" can't define how many groups or races there are. The only group that can be described is the entire human race. Each cline is a map of the distribution of a single trait and while some traits overlap and can be compared, clinal analysis tests the biological concept of race and finds nothing in nature to match it.

 

 

필드웍/현지사역 방법들

 

Fieldwork Methods

관찰방법들

 

Observational Methods

The least invasive of anthropological fieldwork methods, observational methods allow the researcher to gain valuable information about the group being studied without intruding on their privacy too much. The researcher observes the group or individuals, records their findings, reflects on the findings, as well as openly participating with the community. This can make or break the relationship as exampled in Eating Christmas in the Kalahari where Richard Borshay Lee was in a position of power but to keep his research untainted he felt it "was essential to not provide them with food"^[1] It was a very common form of fieldwork during the first half of the 20th century before more progressive and participatory methods became popular. This method uses an eticperspective to simply observe the facets of cultures.

면담과 질문하기 사항

Interviews and Questionnaires

This group of methods focuses on community interaction through language. It usually entails many open ended interviews with participants who are members of a group being studied. The researcher strives to learn as much as they can about the history of the community as well as individuals in order to gain a full understanding of how their culture functions. Interviews can take place individually or with focus groups within the community based on age, status, gender, and other factors that contribute to differences within the community.

Often , this type of research strives to create an open dialogue, or dialectic, in which information flows back and forth between researcher and subject. This dialectic poses a challenge to the objectivity of socially produced data. The challenge is dealt with through reflection on the intersubjective creation of meaning, leading anthropologists to value reflexivity in their ethnographic writing. Because many anthropologists also hope to help the communities they work with to make change on their own terms within the confines of their own culture, in some cases objectivity is abandoned in favor of community based activism and social change.

Questionnaires may cause answers which lack background information or description. By creating multiple choice answers, subjects are limited to a small selection of responses. They cannot elaborate or explain their answers. Though questionnaires do generate quick, easy, and cheap responses, often of a large group of subjects, there is the risk that answers will lack depth or full truth.

참여관찰

Participant Observation

Participant Observation is a anthropological fieldwork method for collected research. It requires that the anthropologist participate in the culture they are researching as well as simply observing it. The information gathered is then recorded and reflected upon to gain further insight into the culture being studied or the question being asked by the researcher.

Participant observation allows a deeper immersion into the culture studied, resulting in a deeper understanding of the culture. It allows the researcher to learn about the culture by speaking with those people within that culture. This develops a deeper rapport with the people of the culture which may result in them opening up more to the researcher, allowing the researcher to see and understand more than they might have as an outsider simply observing the culture.

Participant observation, while a more in-depth research method, isn't perfect. Observed populations may alter their behavior around the researcher because they know that they are being studied, an effect that has been exhaustively documented and studied in psychological research. Thus, while this research method allows for a deeper immersion and understanding in the culture, it faces a very real set of challenges.

반사성 

Reflexivity

This method focuses on the awareness of the researcher and the effect they may be having on the research. It involves a constant awareness and assessment of the researcher's own contribution to and influence on the researcher's subjects and their findings. This principle was perhaps first thought of by William Thomas, as the "Thomas Theorem". Reflexivity requires a researcher's awareness of the effects that he/she might have on the information that is being recorded. Fieldwork in cultural anthropology is a reflexive experience. Anthropologists must constantly be aware that the information they are gathering may be skewed by their ethical opinions, or political standings. Even an anthropologists presence in that culture can effect the results they receive. Reflexive fieldwork must retain a respect for detailed, accurate information gathering, but it also pays precise attention to the ethical and political context of research, the background of the researchers, and the full cooperation of informants. Ethnographers have come to realize that the dependability of their knowledge of other cultures depends on clear recognition of the ethical and political aspects of fieldwork, and the acknowledgment of how these have created this knowledge.Information gathering that is involved with reflective fieldwork must be detailed and accurate. Reflexive fieldwork must also pay precise attention to the ethical and political context of the research, as well as the background of the researchers and the full corporation of informants. Ethnographers have come to realize that in order to gain knowledge of other cultures you must first have clear recognition of the ethical and political aspects that are so deeply involved in fieldwork. The characteristics listed above are known as situated knowledge, the idea that the ethnographer must make explicit exactly who he or she is; these factors then shape the kinds of interactions the ethnogropher will be able to enter into.

In our everyday lives reflexivity is needed in order to better understand other cultures and therefore better understand ourselves. It is important to put your own opinions and ways of life aside so you can open your mind to see how others live. However, it is oftentimes hard to notice whether or not you are using reflexivity. For example, when someone you know talks about their religion, you may immediately disagree with specific aspects of their religion because you have not lived your entire life believing it as they have. At this point, a reflexive approach would be to put your beliefs aside, put yourself in their shoes, and actually research and look into their beliefs. Otherwise, you are only disagreeing based or your beliefs as opposed to actual research. This is reflexivity.

생활 역사들

Life Histories

Life history is a term used to describe when a person conveys their entire life experience, usually starting at childhood and continuing to the present. It is particularly useful in the field of cultural anthropology, as a researcher can get a general picture of the subject’s life in order to analyze their experiences in the context of a larger society. By gathering an array of life histories, an anthropological researcher can gain a better understanding of the culture in which they are studying. Sometimes life history can be documented through very extensive time periods to better understand a group of people. For example, an anthropologist studying the cause and effects of prostitution and drug dependence on young woman's lives in urban areas might use the life histories of some of the people he/she meets. By analyzing the time in which the subjects became dependent on substances and comparing it to the time in which they began practicing prostitution, the anthropologist can begin to understand the situation of these young ladies as well as if one action caused the other. Life history can be used as a very important research component in understanding another culture or just another way of living. ^[2]

현장에 참여하는 접근

 Participatory Approach

This method involves full participation of the researcher with their subjects or community they are studying. Obviously if the researcher is not originally part of the culture they can never be involved to the extent that a native would be, but this method strives to get as close to an emicperspective as possible. The researcher lives with the community, eats as they do, acts as they do and shares this life with the world through their ethnography. The emic approach of collecting data can serve as a more useful data collecting process, and the output data can be more precise than the etic approach on ethnography. From this method came the most common form of anthropological fieldwork method in the modern era:

참여 활동 리서치/조사

Participatory Action Research

This specific method require a community commitment to change. It occurs in five steps:

1. Education on the process or creating a dialogue
2. Collective Investigation
3. Collective Interpretation
4. Collective Action
5. Transformation: Self-Determination and Empowerment

Because of the intrinsic qualities of this type of research, ideally being conducted by people with close ties or membership of a community, it is usually very applicable to some situation in the community. The "research" is an analysis of the community's behavior by community members. Not only are they by necessity motivated to work on the problem, but they will already have significant rapport with other community members to help address and analyze it.

The dynamic attributes of the process allow constant reevaluation and change. This cyclic tendency can develop into healthy adaptation patterns in the community without outside contributions or aid.

할렘 동부에서 필리페 부르고이스 Philippe Bourgois in East Harlem

Under the viaduct in Harlem

An ideal example of the participatory method in fieldwork is Philippe Bourgois in East Harlem. As he describes in his book: In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio^ he lived in East Harlem for a few months in 1985 in hopes of gaining an emic perspective of poverty in one of the world's busiest cities:New York City. Soon he befriended some men in his neighborhood and quickly he had an in with the newly arising crack scene. He lived side by side with dealers, buyers, and users and gained extreme insight into their lives because he too was living life with them. He met them as a friend, not a researcher and was able to form a unique relationship with them. He did not fully participate in their lifestyle which left a small divide, but he was still able to gain a participatory approach to this subculture.

 

 인류학에서 분석 유형들

Types of Analysis

질적 분석(어떻게 왜) 대 양적(심층/하드 자료) 분석

Qualitative vs. Quantitative Analysis

Quantitative research asks where, when and what. Qualitative research asks how and why.

Quite simply, quantitative research is more interested in hard data procured through things like surveys, polls and censuses. It's interested in the percentage of people interviewed that agree with one statement versus another or the number of people in a culture that belong to a certain organization, how many people in a country speak the native language versus how many are bilingual or only speak a foreign language. This method or research usually requires a large random sample group.

Qualitative research isn't as cut and dry as quantitative. Qualitative research is in-depth research that seeks to understand why people do what they do in an attempt to understand culture. It often crosses disciplinary boundaries and strays from a single focused subject. This research method usually requires a smaller sample group.

실증주의적 접근

 

Positivist Approach

Made popular during the late 18th century, this was the primary anthropological method used until the 1970s. It is based around the central idea of positivism, which is defined as a theory that theology and metaphysics are earlier imperfect modes of knowledge and that positive knowledge is based on natural phenomena and their properties and relations as verified by the scientific method.^[2] The main goal of a positivist approach is to produce objective knowledge, which is knowledge about humanity that is true for all people in all times and places. The ideal positivist approach would occur with a physical scientist in a lab, producing concrete results. Anthropologists adapted this method to their own use by testing hypotheses in different cultures under similar conditions. This method was very successful in recording previously unknown data about different peoples, but it was often objective facts about a way of life in which the people of the culture at question were regarded more as lab subjects than actual human beings. Eventually this method was adapted into the reflexive method, to better demonstrate the relationships that exist within communities and the anthropologists own interactions with the informants.

The informants are "people in a particular culture who work with anthroplogists and provide them with insights about their way of life. They can also be called teachers or friends"^[3]. There was a reconsideration of fieldwork that looked not only at the backgrounds of ethnographers way they shaped their fieldwork, but also began to pay more attention to the ethical and political dimensions of the relationship that the anthropologist developed with the people's life he or her is studying, referred to as "informants"^[4].

One highly recognized anthropologist who used a positivist approach was Margaret Mead in the 1930's. She studied three different societies in Papua New Guinea in an effort to determine age and gender roles. She took the same approach to each culture and was able to draw several conclusions about the way that men and women interacted differently by using a positivist approach.

민속학적 참여로 분석

Ethnographic Analysis

Spradley describes ethnography as different from deductive types of social research in that the five steps of ethnographic research: selecting a problem, collecting data, analyzing data, formulating hypotheses, and writing. All five steps happen simultaneously (p. 93-94).

In his book, Spradley describes four types of ethnographic analysis that basically build on each other. The first type of analysis is domain analysis, which is “a search for the larger units of cultural knowledge” (p. 94). The other kinds of analysis are taxonomic analysis, componential analysis, and theme analysis.

All of Spradley’s theories about ethnographic analysis hinge on his belief that researchers should be searching for the meaning that participants make of their lives. These meanings are expressed through symbols, which can be words, but can also be nonverbal cues. However, because this book is about analyzing interviews, Spradley focuses on analyzing the spoken words of the participants. He explains that words are symbols that represent some kind of meaning for an individual, and each symbol has three parts: the symbol itself, what the symbol refers to, and the relationship between the symbol and the referent. Thus, the word computer can be a symbol. It refers to many things, including an individual's own personal computer. Thus, a computer is a kind of computer in the mind, or the idea of a computer, and this shows the relationship between the symbol (computer) and the referent (an actual physical computer).

영역분석

Domain analysis

Spradley defines a domain as the “symbolic category that includes other categories” (p. 100). A domain, then, is a collection of categories that share a certain kind of relationship. Computers is a domain that includes not only my laptop, but all the Dells, Toshibas, iMacs, and IBMs of the world. These all share the same relationship because they are all kinds of computers. Spradley explains that there are three elements of a domain. First, the cover term, which in my example is the word “computer”. Second, there are included terms, which are all the types of computers I just listed. Finally, there is the single, unifying semantic relationship, which is the idea that “X, Y, and Z are all kinds of A”.

When doing domain analysis, Spradley suggests first doing a practice run, which he calls preliminary searches. To do this, you select a portion of your data and search for names that participants give to things. You then identify whether any of these listed nouns might possibly be cover terms for domains. Finally, you can then search through your data for possible included terms that might fit under this domain you have identified.

Remember, this was just the warm-up. To actually do domain analysis, you look for relationships in the data, not names. Spradley is famous for his very useful list of possible relationships that may exist in your data:

1. Strict inclusion (X is a kind of Y)
2. Spatial (X is a place in Y, X is a part of Y)
3. Cause-effect (X is a result of Y, X is a cause of Y)
4. Rationale (X is a reason for doing Y)
5. Location for action (X is a place for doing Y)
6. Function (X is used for Y)
7. Means-end (X is a way to do Y)
8. Sequence (X is a step or stage in Y)
9. Attribution (X is an attribute, or characteristic, of Y)

To do domain analysis, you first pick one semantic relationship. Spradley suggests strict inclusion or means-end as good ones for starters. Second, you select a portion of your data and begin reading it, and while doing so you fill out a domain analysis worksheet where you list all the terms that fit the semantic relationship you chose. Third (if you follow along in Spradley’s book, you’ll notice I’m crunching his steps together for brevity) you formulate questions for each domain. So to revert to my example, if you identified from your interview with me that I feel that Macs are kinds of computers, you could test this hypothesis by making a question out of this semantic statement, “Are there different kinds of computers?” You could ask me, or another participant, and based on their answer, you would know if the cover term, included terms, and semantic relationship that you identified were correct. You could then probe with more questions like, “Why are Macs a kind of computer?” or “In what way are Macs a kind of computer?” In this way, your analysis feeds into your next round of data collection.

The final step in domain analysis is to make a list of all the hypothetical domains you have identified, the relationships in these domains, and the structural questions that follow your analysis.

소 범주분석

Taxonomic Analysis

Taxonomic Analysis is a search for the way that cultural domains are organized, building upon the first type of analysis, this form of research is best defined as the classification of data in the form x is a kind of y (D'Andrade, 92). Used largely for the organization and grouping of plant and animal species, taxonomic analysis is not focused on the features of an organism but rather the variable genetic differences that define them. For example, scientists can refer to the common chimpanzee using the taxonomy pan troglodyte and make specific references to that species without fear of error in their classification and use of data. Taxonomic Analysis usually involves drawing a graphical interpretation of the ways in which the individual participants move, form groups, and pattern the structure of a conversation.

References

1. ↑ Eating Christmas in the Kalahari
2. ↑ Zaira Jagudina, The life stories of the human rights NGO activists and (g)local public spaces in post-Soviet Russia: Moving from 'personal' to 'political' April 2002 Zaira Jagudina.
3. ↑ Schultz, Emily A.;Lavenda, Robert H.Cultural Anthropology: A Perspective on the Human Condition (7th Ed.). Oxford University Press 2009 P. 50
4. ↑ ibid

^ "Positivism." Def. 1. Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary. 11th ed. 2003.

^ Bourgois, Philip, In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio Cambridge University Press, 1995.

 

 

인류학과 문화 인류학은

현지인의 문화를 이해하려

현지참여 관찰, 조사와 분석, 패턴찾기, 평가 적용으로 가는 접근법을 사용한다. 

문화 이론은 전통 기독교의 섭리론/예정론을 넘어서서

인간적인 진화론에서...... 현대화, 세계화까지 발전되었다.

 

 

The Golden Bough

The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion is a wide-ranging, comparative study of mythology and religion, written by the Scottish anthropologist Sir James George Frazer (1854–1941). It was first published in two volumes in 1890; in three volumes in 1900; and the third edition, published 1906–15, comprised twelve volumes. The work was aimed at a wide literate audience raised on tales as told in such publications as Thomas Bulfinch's The Age of Fable, or Stories of Gods and Heroes (1855).

종교 현상학 연구로 신학 시각을 벗어나

Frazer offered a modernist approach to discussing religion, treating it dispassionately as a cultural phenomenon rather than from a theological perspective. The influence of The Golden Bough on contemporary European literature and thought was substantial.

Subject matter 이 책의 연구 주제

J. M. W. Turner's painting of the Golden Bough incident in the Aeneid

이 책에서 프레이저는

종교 신앙(마술)과 과학적 사고의 고공 요소들을 규명하려 한다.

The Golden Bough attempts to define the shared elements of religious belief to scientific thought, discussing fertility rites, 

human sacrifice, the dying god, the scapegoat and many other symbols and practices whose influence has extended into twentieth-century culture. 

Its thesis is that old religions were fertility cults that revolved around the worship of, and periodic sacrifice of, a sacred king. 

Frazer proposed that mankind progresses from magic through religious belief to scientific thought.^[3]

이 논제는 제이 터너가 윤색

This thesis was developed in relation to J. M. W. Turner's painting of The Golden Bough, a sacred grove where a certain tree grew day and night. 

It was a transfigured landscape in a dream-like vision of the woodland lake of Nemi, "Diana's Mirror" where religious ceremonies and 

the "fulfillment of vows" of priests and kings were held.

The king was the incarnation of a dying and reviving god, a solar deity who underwent a mystic marriage to a goddess of the Earth. He died at the harvest and was reincarnated in the spring. Frazer claims that this legend of rebirth is central to almost all of the world's mythologies.

The Judgement of Paris - an Etruscan bronze-handled mirror of the fourth or third century BC that relates the often misunderstood myth as interpreted by Frazer, showing the three goddesses giving their apple or pomegranate to the new king, who must kill the old king - Campana Collection, Greek, Etruscan and Roman Antiquities, Sully

Frazer based his thesis on the pre-Roman priest-king at the fane of Nemi, who was ritually murdered by his successor:

"When I first put pen to paper to write The Golden Bough I had no conception of the magnitude of the voyage on which I was embarking; I thought only to explain a single rule of an ancient Italian priesthood." (Aftermath, p. vi)

The book's title was taken from an incident in the Aeneid, illustrated by the British artist Joseph Mallord William Turner: Aeneas and the Sibyl present the golden bough to the gatekeeper of Hades to gain admission.

Reception 학계에 용납

비옥토 종교 의식들과 기독교 십자가죽음과 부활을 비교해

The book scandalized the British public when first published, as it included the Christian story of Jesus and the Resurrection in its comparative study. 

Critics thought this treatment invited an agnostic reading of the Lamb of God as a relic of a pagan religion. 

For the third edition, Frazer placed his analysis of the Crucifixion in a speculative appendix; 

the discussion of Christianity was excluded from the single-volume abridged edition.

이 책은 말리놉스키 같은 인류학자에 영향

The book's influence on the emerging discipline of anthropology was pervasive and undeniable. 

For example, Bronisław Malinowski, stricken with tuberculosis shortly after receiving his doctorate in physics and mathematics, 

read Frazer's work in the original English to distract himself from his illness.

"No sooner had I read this great work than I became immersed in it and enslaved by it. I realized then that anthropology, 

as presented by Sir James Frazer, is a great science, worthy of as much devotion as any of her elder and more exact studies and 

I became bound to the service of Frazerian anthropology."

Despite the controversy the work may have generated, and its critical reception amongst other scholars, 

  The Golden Bough inspired the creative literature of the period. 

시인 로벗 그레브스 [하얀 여신들]

The poet Robert Graves adapted Frazer's concept of the dying king sacrificed for the good of the kingdom to 

the romantic idea of the poet's suffering for the sake of his Muse-Goddess, as reflected in his book on poetry, rituals, and myths, 

The White Goddess (1948). 

윌리엄 예이츠

William Butler Yeats refers to Frazer's thesis in his poem "Sailing to Byzantium". H. P. Lovecraft mentions the book in 

his short story "The Call of Cthulhu". 

디 에스 엘리엇

T. S. Eliot acknowledged indebtedness to Frazer in his first note to his poem The Waste Land. William Carlos Williams refers to it in Book Two, 

part two, of his extended poem in five books Paterson. 

프로이트 외

Sigmund Freud, James Joyce, Ernest Hemingway, D. H. Lawrence, Aleister Crowley, Ezra Pound, William Gaddis, Mary Renault, Joseph Campbell, Roger Zelazny, Naomi Mitchison (in her The Corn King and the Spring Queen), and Camille Paglia, are some of the authors whose work shows the deep influence of The Golden Bough. Its literary ripples and references have given it continued life, even as its direct influence in anthropology has waned.

Critical analysis [금 가지] 비평적 분석

The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein returned time and again to The Golden Bough, 

often enough that his commentaries have been compiled as Remarks on Frazer's Golden Bough, edited by Rush Rhees, 

originally published in 1967 (the English edition followed in 1971). 

He writes, "Frazer is much more savage than most of these savages." 

Weston LaBarre observed that Frazer was "the last of the scholastics", and 

wrote The Golden Bough "as an extended footnote to a line in Virgil he felt he did not understand."

Some modern critics set Frazer in the broader context of the history of ideas, for example, 

Robert Ackerman in his The Myth and Ritual School: J. G. Frazer and the Cambridge Ritualists. 

The myth and ritual school includes scholars Jane Harrison, Gilbert Murray, F. M. Cornford, and 

A.B. Cook, who were connecting the new discipline of myth theory and anthropology with traditional literary classics 

at the end of the nineteenth century. 

This school was an important influence on much Modernist literature.

Publishing history [금 가지] 출판 역사

Editions

• First edition, 2 vols., 1890. (Vol. I - II)
• Second edition, 3 vols., 1900. (Vol. I - II - III)
• Third edition, 12 vols., 1906-15. (Vol. V, VI, XII)
  • Volume 1 (1906): The Magic Art and the Evolution of Kings (Part 1) 1920 (reprint)
  • Volume 2 (1911): The Magic Art and the Evolution of Kings (Part 2)
  • Volume 3 (1911): Taboo and the Perils of the Soul
  • Volume 4 (1911): The Dying God
  • Volume 5 (1914): Adonis, Attis, Osiris (Part 1)
  • Volume 6 (1914): Adonis, Attis, Osiris (Part 2)
  • Volume 7 (1912): Spirits of the Corn and of the Wild (Part 1)
  • Volume 8 (1912): Spirits of the Corn and of the Wild (Part 2)
  • Volume 9 (1913): The Scapegoat
  • Volume 10 (1913): Balder the Beautiful (Part 1)
  • Volume 11 (1913): Balder the Beautiful (Part 2)
  • Volume 12 (1915): Bibliography and General Index

Supplement 보충본

1937 edition: Aftermath: A Supplement to the Golden Bough

Abridged editions 완전 총집 본

• Abridged edition, 1 vol., 1922. This edition excludes Frazer's references to Christianity.
  • 1995 Touchstone edition, ISBN 0-684-82630-5
  • 2002 Dover reprint of 1922 edition, ISBN 0-486-42492-8
• Abridged edition, edited by Robert Fraser for Oxford University Press, 1994. It restores the material on Christianity purged in the first abridgement. ISBN 0-19-282934-3