History of Anthropology Newsletter

Volume 25 Issue 1 June 1998 Article 1

January 1998

Volume 25, Issue 1

Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/han

Part of the Anthropology Commons, and the History of Science, Technology, and Medicine Commons

Recommended Citation (1998) "Volume 25, Issue 1," History of Anthropology Newsletter: Vol. 25 : Iss. 1 , Article 1. Available at: https://repository.upenn.edu/han/vol25/iss1/1

This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/han/vol25/iss1/1 For more information, please contact [email protected]. H istory of A' nthropology N ewsletter

XXV:l 1998 History of Anthropology Newsletter

VOLUME XXV, NUMBER 1 June 1998

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOOTNOTES FOR THE IDSTORY OF ANTHROPOLOGY

Burckhardtian Culture History and the "Durkheim-Mauss Bug"...... 3

SOURCES FOR THE IDSTORY OF ANTHROPOLOGY ...... 7

RESEARCH IN PROGRESS ...... 8

BIBLIOGRAPHICA ARCANA

I. History of Anthropology in the Netherlands ...... 8

II. Recent Dissertations ...... •...... 13

III. Recent Work by Subscribers ...... 14

IV. Suggested by Our Readers ...... 15

GLEANINGS FROM ACADEMIC GATHERINGS ...... 20 The Editorial Committee

Robert Bieder Regna Darnell Indiana University University of Western Ontario

Curtis Hinsley Dell Hymes Northern Arizona University University of Virginia

George W. Stocking William Sturtevant University of Chicago Smithsonian Institution

Subscription rates

(Each volume contains two numbers: June and December)

Individual subscribers (North America) $5.00 Student subscribers 3.00 Institutional subscribers 7.00 Subscribers outside North America 7.00

Checks for renewals, new subscriptions or back numbers should be made payable (in United States dollars only) to:

History of Anthropology Newsletter (or to HAN).

Direct all correspondence relating to subscriptions and editorial matters to:

George W. Stocking, HAN Department of Anthropology University of Chicago 1126 East 59th Street Chicago, IDinois 60637

Subscribers and contributors should understand that HAN is carried on with a small budget as a spare-time activity. We depend very much on our readers to send along bibliographic notes, research reports, and items for our other departments. It will not always be possible, however, to acknowledge contributions, or to explain the exclusion of those few items not clearly related to the history of anthro- pology or for other reasons inappropriate.

For similar reasons, we must keep correspondence and documentation relating to institutional or subscription service billing to an absolute minimum.

2 HAN ON THE WEB: With a view to the future, we are establishing a HAN website at

http://anthro.spc. uchicago.edulhan/

As of press time, there is nothing to be found there save our logo, but we do plan to develop the site over the next several months. The format and content categories are not yet definite, and we welcome suggestions as to the sorts of material that might be included. Although we do not plan to include current numbers of HAN as such, the site will probably offer selected material from past volumes, as well as '"between numbers" bibliography.

FOOTNOTES FOR THE IDSTORY OF ANTHROPOLOGY

Burckhardtian Culture History and the "Durkheim-Mauss Bug" in Paul Radin's Letters to Edward Sapir Grant Arndt University of Chicago

Paul Radin was one of the most heterodox anthropologists among the first generation of Franz Boas' students. His primary theoretical works, Primitive Man as a Philosopher (1927) and Method and Theory in Ethnology (1933), reflect a characteristic interest in the role of individuals in '"primitive" cultures (a description he used with a degree of irony), and in a humanistic, rather than scientific form of ethnology. Two letters from Radin's correspondence with Edward Sapir provide insight into the development of his idiosyncratic approach to anthropology. Written during the period (1913-1917) when Radin was employed through annual contracts by the Geological Survey of Canada (then headed by Sapir) to do research on the Ojibwa Indians of southeast Ontario (DuBois 1960:xi, Sacharov n.d.), they anticipate the key themes of Radin's main published theoretical works. The first letter, from early 1914, contains a critique of Boas, not unusual among the first generation of students in this period, but one which Radin would later elaborate (and extend to Sapir and other Boasians) in Method and Theory of Ethnology (1933). The letter provides a succinct introduction to Radin's notion of '"culture history," a research agenda very different than the contemporary approaches of other Boasians such as Sapir, or than that subsequently developed in recent decades by proponents of historical anthropology or ethnohistory. Radin's criticism of Boas for having "not once told [his students] to study the Indian as individuals" in the first letter is picked up and elaborated in the second letter, written two years later. Judging by the letter's contents, the occasion seems to have been the publication in Science that week of Clark Wissler's "Psycholical and Historical Interpretations of Culture" (1916). Radin's critique of"the French school" is pertinent for its unique framing ofhis interest in the individual in sociological terms. In the later Method Theory-, Radin programmatically distinguished his own culture historical approach from "sociological" and other approaches to ethnology. His suggested temperamental typology of the '"intellectual, emotional and man of action" later appeared much more prominently in Primitive Man as Philosopher (1927). The second typology of ''the religious, moderately religious, and non-religious" temperaments had already appeared in his "Religion of the North American lndians"(l914) and is an important presupposition of his analysis of the text he published as Crashing Thunder. the Autobiography of a Winnebago Indian (1926). Radin's discussion of the "intellectual whims" of the "four Semites" (Sapir, Lowie, Goldenweiser, and himself) in the introductory paragraph of the second letter adds to our awareness of the already recognized propensities of the early Boasians to look to the

3 humanities for respite from the "tyranny of modem science." It is, moreover, as characteristic a statement of Radin the man as the remainder ofboth letters is of Radin the theorist.

Hotel Vendome, Sarnia, Ontario Jan. 27, 1914 Dear Sapir,

I sent you a business letter this morning-this is intended as an intellectual feast! I will wade right into my subject.

What you say about Boas doesn't surprise me. After careful reflection, during the last year I have come to the conclusion that it is not legitimate to regard Boas' faults of commission and omission as little foibles. On the contrary, they are basic characteristics and affect and have affected his work at all times. If in this letter, I dwell almost exclusively on Boas' faults, you will of course not forget that I appreciate keenly his achievements and that we all have paid hitn his [mede] of praise, even hero worship. I sincerely believe that Boas' work is done. He was at his best in opening up vistas and applying a commonsense method to ethnology. The originality of his method has it is true been over estimated, as anyone trained in modern history can see, but considering the conditions in which he found scholarship in the [18]80s and 90s-really then an apparent adjunct of biology--his work was both opportune and effective. He touched on every phase of ethnology and achieved wonders in suggesting problems, working one out here & there, but then he stopped. I maintain that he stopped not because one man could not do more, but emphatically because he does not possess the genius required for that kind of work. What is needed now is an historian, a man with a sense of historical growth and a tnan with constructive inspiration. Boas has neither of these talents, as is manifest by his attitude towards languages and the fact that in ethnology he has not once insisted on the dynamic aspects of the subject. He is an anatomist, but not a physiologist. Indeed I have never heard him in his lectures express the slightest desire "to see the wheels go around."

Another defect is that he lays too much stress on establishing the truth of certain general factors, like dissemination, convergent evolution, independent origin, etc. No real historian ever worries much about these things in the rough. What he wants to obtain is an intimate picture of how a people lived, worked, ate--for my part urinated--but it should be intimate. To imagine for one minute, that a real historian is--or should be--interested merely in the development of a culture is lop-sided. Many of course do think so & Boas shares this trait with them. But unfortunately that is the one thing in which ethnology differs from history. It may be deplored, but it is nevertheless a fact that chronology is and will always be impossible in primitive culture and any attempt to reconstruct one will be artificial & what is worse vague. It is essential to recognize this fact and the corollary it entails, that corollary being--tum to the other aspect of ethnology--that of complete, comprehensive and sympathetic interpretation. From this point of view ethnology can be made a real hutnan science instead of one of bones and dust. It is only from this angle likewise that she can stimulate history, for naturally with the small number of individuals to be dealt with, as a rule--a picture can be obtained of individual variation, of the play of individual forces, that is wholly impossible in history of the past but that will unquestionably play a great role in the new history of the present & the future.

To all these things Boas has been indifferent. He has insisted on analytical examinations, warned us against taking an analysis as historical demonstration, yet he has not once told us to study the Indians as individuals. Thus all the real points of social organization, religion, mythology-as a literary product, have escaped him. "Methodology" is excellent, his insistence

4 upon the fairly correct one that he formulated will constitute one of his achievements--but it is only the beginning. Goldie [Alexander Goldenweiser], if he doesn't look out, will follow in his footsteps without having Boas' justification.

There is also one other thing about Boas and for that matter about Goldie & Lowie. They are afraid to be wrong, & being afraid to be wrong, they will not hazard interpretation. If they do not put this out of their constitutions, they will fall short of ever even remotely understanding primitive people. You must have the ability to put yourself in another man's place--knowing nevertheless that you are not the other man--and try to feel like him. Your data must of course he kept separate from your interpretation, but you must have the guts to interpret. I'm going to do it with the Winnebago and shall consider myself engaging in a legitimate enterprise, if I get as near the truth as Burckhardt did in his "Cultur der Renaissance." Wish me luck!

My critique of Boas sounded to my ears, at first, like an obituary notice, but the line I improved toward the end gave it something of the nature of an epitaph. However, even I cannot stand the strain of further literary output, so will close, with love to your wife, your reading of her "love" as regard to the contrary not withstanding.

Yours, Radin

Santa Fe, N.Mex. Feb. 19, 1916

Dear Edward;

I just received your letter and it made me think of the fact that we anthropologists, i.e. the four Semites who graduated under Boas, are either an unusual aggregation of men or a self- centered set who insist upon giving in to their intellectual whims whenever the spirit prompts them. Here I am inveighing against the tyranny of modem science which insists that you do original research and hack work, when it is so much better for your soul and your mind to lie on your back and gaze into a New Mexican sky, walk into the mountains, or, still better, read history of Greek and Latin, while Lowie until recently wanted to write and read philosophy and Goldie wanted to read books like Levy-Bruhl and Durkheim. Now come you with your composing and delight in modem literature! Thank the lord it is so. I, for my part, would far prefer to live on $600 a year "somewhere in France or Italy" than be compelled to work at Anthropology at six times that salary. To cultivate anthropology in the old way has not, as you know, appealed to me for the last two years and the only thing that makes the study of primitive people of interest to me is the possibility I vaguely descry of writing an interpretive study of the Winnebago or Ojibwa or, (unless the European War ends too soon), of the Bella Coola. Whether such an undertaking would be of any permanent scientific value to the world I do not know, and I do not much care, but I know that it would be of permanent value to me and satisfy certain aesthetic cravings of mine that field-work threatened for a time to dull. What I would most like to devote myself to is a history of the unintellectual class of Europe and I believe that the training I have had in anthropology and my enduring affection for history ought to stand me in good stead. Naturally I would want to do this in Italy or southern France, where one does not resent the passing of the years as here in America.

However let me sober up a little. Have you read Wissler's vice-presidential address? It disappointed me keenly. His separation of what is to be left to the professional psychologist and

5 what to the anthropologist seems to me to be puerile in the extreme. Why should a man who can define accurately what constitutes the process of thought, of imagination etc. be more correct in his interpretation of the individual than a thoughtful anthropologist? And barring certain technical information, is not every thoughtful anthropologist as good a psychologist as the psychologist, even although he does not know the difference between the modem and the older theories of color perception, for instance? And again what is all this metaphysics about the activity of complexes of human groups from which the "permanent individualities and the equipment by birth" are excluded? To say that the question of the behaviour of man as an individual is a problem for the psychologist to determine,· that any anthropologist's contribution thereto is, from the nature of the case, as naive as the psychologist[']s interpretation of cultural phenomena appears to be to the anthropologist, seems to indicate that Wissler has been bitten by the Durkheim-Mauss bug, known in American by only one species, [Wilson] Wallis Oxfordgensis. By what magical process has Wissler arrived at an understanding of the group activities, if he, not being a psychologist, has no moral or other right to investigate the behaviour of the individual? The fundamental question involved here is to determine the relation of the individual to the group, to discover in how far the group is really the mere union of individuals described in terms of certain individualities, intellectual, emotional or men of action or in how far it transcends them. Before he discusses this preliminary problem his definition of cultural phenomena as "the acquired activity of complexes of human groups" is rather meaningless and represents no improvement over those advanced by the "meddling psychologist." For me the nature and origin of human culture can only be approached in one way and that is the following. I do not much care at which end you begin, whether with the individual or the group. It is admitted that the problem to be discussed is the nature and the origin of the group. We know that group activities are performed by a number of individuals, therefore, the first thing to study is the information possessed by these individuals and the manner in which they act. We know however that an individual living apart from other individuals is more or less an abstraction[,] that it does not occur in fact. All this is of course admitted. But this does not at all prevent the activities of a dozen people performing a ceremony from being merely the activities of twelve distinct individuals. Now whether each one of these individuals has the identical feeling, while performing the ceremony, is one of the questions to be determined. From the few observations that I have made, this is not a fact. Every individual has a characteristically different way of emotionally approaching the ceremony, due to his peculiar temperament, or lack of it, or his particular experiences in life. The unity that is so frequently predicated of the group while performing a ceremony is, in reality, merely apparent and consists very likely in a marked similarity in the performance of certain purely external functions. For purposes of general description it may be necessary to discard many of the details of individual behaviour, both objective and subjective, but we must never forget that such a description is extremely defective. It is an average and contains, or ought to contain, as much truth as an average. That is the first, perhaps rather trite point that I wish to make. But does it even contain as much truth as an average? I doubt it. One of the essential characteristics of an average is that the majority of cases should approximate, within certain degrees, to this average. If, to give an example, I take a deeply religious individual and study him, how near am I to understanding the average attitudes of two dozen men performing a ceremony, or to the average point of view on religious matters? I insist that I am not very near. For that reason, it seems to me, only that description which takes at least three types of temperaments into consideration--adhering now to the case of religion--, the intensely religious man, the intermittently religious man and non-religious man, can make any claim toward being even a moderately acceptable average. In other aspects of culture it may be necessary to make either more or fewer divisions. That will have to be determined upon. My second point then is that the average used be not so general as to be meaningless.

6 Now group activities, it will be admitted by all, are the activities of individuals. We know however that the French School claims that when acting in groups, the activities transcend those of the myriad individuals who compose the groups. Let us admit that this is true, for the moment. The real difficulty with which, in my opinion, this school is confronted is not so much the proof of this general proposition as the manner in which they try to demonstrate it in detail. I don't care to go into too great detail in this letter, but in general it may be said that the French theorists adopt a method of proof that sins against the point I made before, they do not employ acceptable averages. They as a matter of fact, go even further, water their average and forget completely that they are averages. As for the general proposition as such, all it means is that the relations of men and women living in a state of society are capable of so many permutations and combinations that no accurate description is possible, that all we can possibly hope for is an approximation. We must then, once and for all, give up any attempt to treat Anthropology as a natural science, to seek for laws. If that means, as friend Lowie once insisted, that anthropology and history are consequently merely branches of belles lettres, we will have to let it go at that.

Well, that'l [sic] be all for today. It has taken me three weeks to finish this letter. Please send on the two pieces of music you spoke of and, if you can, your manuscript on Method.

Now that the new fiscal year is fast approaching I am anxiously awaiting the arrival of my new contract.

Love to Mrs. Sapir. Yours, Radin

Acknowledgements: The two Radin letters are reproduced by permission of the Canadian Museum of Civilization, Correspondence Edward Sapir Paul Radin, cat. Number I-A-236M

Works Cited

DuBois, Cora. 1960. "Paul Radin: An Appreciation." In Culture in History: Essays in Honor of Paul Radin. edited by Stanley Diamond. New York. Radin,. Paul. 1914. "Religion ofthe North American Indians." Journal of American Folklore. ___( ed.) 1926. Crashing Thunder: The Autobiography of an American Indian. New York. ___1927. Primitive Man as Philosopher. New York: Appleton and Co. ___1933. The Method and Theory of Ethnology: An Essay in Criticism. New York Sacharov, Mary. n.d. "Radin and Sapir: Friendship and Influence." Unpublished manuscript. Marquette University, Department of Special Collections. Wissler, Clark. 1916. "Psychological and Historical Interpretations for Culture." Science. Feb.ll, 193-201.

SOURCES FOR THE ffiSTORY OF ANTHROPOLOGY

Archives of the Texas Archeological Research Laboratory (TARL}-Dedicated to the preservation of archeological records "from Texas and adjacent areas," TARL (at the University of Texas, Austin) contains materials "documenting the history of anthropology and archeology in Texas dating back to the early 1900s. A 93 page Guide to the historic materials ofthe TARL edited by Gail L. Bailey, published in 1997, includes text and illustrations relating to the history ofTARL, as well a detailed inventory of 180 linear feet of manuscript collections relating to the

7 activities of particular individuals, institutions (including the WPA, the University of Texas department and museum of anthropology, and the Central Texas Archeological Society), as well as the TARL itself. Not included in this publication are inventories of 650 linear feet of records documenting the projects and sites in the 254 counties of Texas, which will be in part later this year through the Texas Historical Commission's Texas Historical Sites Atlas Project.

RESEARCH IN PROGRESS:

Julia J. Smith (New School of Social Research) is doing research for a master's thesis on the early years of anthropology at the New School, and would greatly appreciate hearing of relevant sources, or from people doing related research.

BffiLIOGRAPlllCA ARCANA

I. The History of Anthropology in the Netherlands HanF. Vermeulen University ofLeiden

The history of anthropology in the Netherlands and its former colonies in the East and West Indies has been studied by many scholars in the Netherlands and abroad. Because there are no research institutes and few postdoctoral grants available for the subdiscipline, conditions for research are not optimal. Even so, there is an abundance of material, and a dozen doctoral dissertations have been defended or are now in progress. A full bibliography would take up 60 pages of text, only a selection of which can be presented here. Before discussing some of this material, a brief outline of the history of anthropology in the Netherlands may help to set the stage.

Development of Dutch Anthropology:

Anthropology in the Netherlands developed in the wake of Oriental studies and in co- operation with geography and sociology. Relations with physical anthropology and prehistoric archeology have been weak and are even today virtually non-existent. Similarly, sociology has also been independent, particularly since the institution in 1963 of the Faculty of Social Sciences at Dutch universities. From the beginnings, anthropology has had a strong regional orientation towards the study of Indonesia. The first anthropological chair was established at the University ofLeiden in Iand-en volkenkunde or 'geography and ethnography' of the Netherlands East Indies (1877). The first four occupants were P.J. Veth, G.A. Wilken, J.J.M. de Groot, and A W. Nieuwenhuis (Heslinga 1975, Locher 1978c, de Josselin de Jong & Vermeulen 1989, de Wolf & Jaarsma 1991).

The study of the ethnography of Indonesia was closely connected with a training course for colonial civil servants called Indologie, first given at an intermediate level at Delft (1843-1900) and Leiden (1864-1891), then at university level at the universities of Leiden (1902-1956) and Utrecht (1925-1955). In Batavia (now Jakarta), courses were also given in Indonesian languages, history, geography, Islam, colonial and customary law, although generally the training of colonial civil servants and lawyers took place in the motherland rather than in the colonies (Warmenhoven 1977, Feddema & van den Muyzenberg 1978, Fasseur 1993).

In 1907 a chair in general volkenkunde was established at the University of Amsterdam, to which S.R. Steinmetz, who had studied at Leiden, was appointed (Fahrenfort 1933, 1963; Kobben 1992, 1996). In contrast to Leiden and Utrecht, the students entering the curriculum at Amsterdam

8 were mainly students in geography, a situation that lasted until after World War II. After the independence of Indonesia (1949) general ethnology was renamed 'cultural anthropology,' and Indologie was transformed in 1952-53 into 'non-western sociology' or 'sociology of non-western peoples' (Schoorll967a, 1970; Kloos 1988, 1989). Earlier described as applied anthropology (Held 1953, Schoorl 1967b, 1996; Jongmans 1976), and now recast as development sociology, "non- western sociology" developed in close connection with cultural anthropology, as departments that combined both courses were established. This implied a fundamental change insofar as anthropology, formerly only one of the subjects in the Indo logy curriculum, vvas now on a par with non-western sociology, a transformed version oflndology.

In addition to those mentioned, chairs in ethnology were established at the Agricultural University of Wageningen (1946), the Catholic University of Nijmegen (1948), the University of Groningen (1951) and the Free University of Amsterdam (1956). Chairs in non-western sociology were established at the universities of Amsterdam (1947 and 1965), Utrecht (1955) and Leiden (1956), at Wageningen (1956), Nijmegen (1958), the Free University of Amsterdam (1962) and at the Economic University ofRotterdam (1964).

Prior to World War II, anthropology was pursued not only at the universities, but also in learned societies, specialized research institutes and ethnographical museums. Such museums were established at Batavia (1836), Leiden (1837, by P.F.B. von Siebold, a German physician who had worked for the Dutch in Japan), Delft (1864), Rotterdam (1885), Amsterdam (1926) and, more recently, at Groningen (1968) and Nijmegen (1969). The history of these museums has been scantily discussed, mostly in expensive volumes on 'masterpieces', but recently a trend to publish specialized volumes on collections and collectors has become manifest.

The Historiography of anthropology (part 1):

The study of the history of Dutch anthropology (including non-western sociology) has reflected these developments. During the nineteenth century ethnography was practised in relation to Oriental studies (Boele van Hensbroek 1875) and to geography (Tiele 1884). But when during the early twentieth century attempts were made to develop a general ethnology, founding fu.thers of modem Dutch anthropology such as S.R Steinmetz (Amsterdam), J.P.B. de Josselin de Jong (Leiden) and H.Th. Fischer (Utrecht) started to teach history of anthropology as part of their efforts to formulate new paradigms. Steinmetz published a 'History of Ethnology' in 1917, followed by a 'History of Sociology'; van Eerde wrote a review of ethnological investigations in Indonesia (1923); de Josselin de Jong located his subject within a genealogy going back to Linnaeus in his (second) inaugural lecture on Indonesia as 'a Field of Ethnological Study' (1935) and distributed stencilled lecture notes on 'The origins of scientific ethnology' among his students around 1938; Fischer dealt with the history of ethnology in his inaugural lecture ( 1936) and in an encyclopaedia entry on ethnology (1938); Schrieke (1948) published a report on scientific work done in the colonies during the period 1918-43.

During the 1940s and 1950s the first studies on the history of Dutch anthropology were published, dealing mainly with the subdiscipline of applied anthropology as practised within the Indology curriculum. In 1944, the American Indonesianist Raymond Kennedy stated that the Dutch East Indies civil service was 'the only official body in the world that has made the study of ethnology, native language, and native law compulsory for all its staf(' and in 1945 Kennedy published a substantial bibliography. That same year there was brief reference to Dutch contributions in Malinowski's posthumous Dynamics of Culture Change. A fuller account was given by G.J. Held (1953) in a paper on 'Applied Anthropology in Government' presented at the W enner-Gren conference in New York. Following a precedent set by Herskovits (1946) to associate

9 Dutch research with that in Belgium, A.A. Gerbrands published a overview of the situation in 'The Netherlands and Belgium' in 1953, a linkage repeated two years later A.J. van Bork nee Feltkamp (1955). The latter presented anthropology in the broad sense, including ethnology and folklore studies, but concentrated on physical anthropology (a subject on which she had written a major monograph in 1938; see also Constandse-Westermann 1983). Gerbrands published a more detailed overview of cultuial anthropology in Holland (1959), which, significantly, was written in French, reflecting Gerbrands' participation in the 'mouvement structuraliste' between Leiden and Paris- although he mentioned all the other centers in the Netherlands as well.

The first serious review of the history of 'Cultural Anthropology in The Netherlands' was published by P.E. de Josselin de Jong (1960), a successor to his uncle at Leiden. He pointed out that the development of Dutch anthropology had been determined not only by a relationship with the colonial state, but also by an intimate relation with Oriental, mainly linguistic, studies-a field surveyed by G.W.J. Drewes on 'Oriental Studies in the Netherlands' (1957), which also carried a 'Selected Bibliography of Oriental Studies' by E.M. Uhlenbeck. In his later historiographical articles P.E. de Josselin de Jong discussed 'the anthropological tradition in the Netherlands' from a structuralist point of view, beginning with a paper for the 1968 Wenner-Gren Conference on national traditions in anthropology, which (at the editor's suggestion) appeared under a quite different title in 1980. There he traced the origins of structural anthropology in Leiden to the work of van Hien, van Ossenbruggen, Rassers and J.P.B. de Josselin de Jong, at the same time underlining the fundamental importance of the work of Marcel Mauss and Emile Durkheim. Later publications included an important essay on 'Marcel Mauss et les origines de l'anthropologie structurale Hollandaise' (1972); and the introduction to de Jong's collection of translated essays on 'Structural Anthropology in the Netherlands' (1977). These studies ofLeiden structuralism were complemented by Locher (1978a- b, 1981,1982, 1988), vanBaal(l977, 1986-89)andJaarsma(1984).

Meanwhile, Henri Claessen and Peter Kloos, both from Amsterdam but working in Leiden, had joined in an effort to make Dutch anthropology in general better known. With the financial support of the Ministry of Education and Science they edited two volumes entitled Current Anthropology in the Netherlands (1975) and Current Issues in Anthropology: The Netherlands (1981). Both were published by the Anthropological Branch of the Nederlandse Sociologische en Antropologische Vereniging and were distributed to participants at two international conferences held at Amsterdam. A third volume was published as Contemporary Anthropology in the Netherlands (1992). Each of the two volumes carried a number of thematic and regional reviews of Dutch research, and was introduced by an historiographical essay by Kloos. one on the origins and institutional structure of anthropology and non-western sociology in the Netherlands (1975); a second (1981) on 'Themes ofthe 'Seventies,' in which he analysed 96 recent doctoral dissertations. The 1992 volume was of a different nature, but had an interesting piece by Kloos on 'Anthropology in the Netherlands: The 1980s and Beyond'.

In the mid-1970s, the close interrelations between ethnology and the administration of the colonies also caught the attention of several foreign scholars (Hirano 1975, Koentjaraningrat 1975, du Toit 1975, Ellen 1976), although a thorough critical study is not yet available. A serious study of the transformation of the lndology courses was published by Kloos in 1989, which, however, discusses only the outcome of the development and does not touch upon the intrinsic relations between ethnology and Indology. A book on the history of the lndology training courses, written by the historian Fasseur (1993), somewhat neglects the part played by anthropology in these courses. Aspects of this relationship are covered in de Josselin de Jong and Vermeulen (1989). Since the 1970s, the interrelation of anthropology and colonialism has been taken up in a number of studies, as we shall see in a later issue.

10 References Cited:

Baal, Jan van. 1977. Geschiedenis en groei van de theorie der culturele anthropologie (tot ca. 1970). Leiden: Bureau Indonesische Studien (Indon. transl. Jakarta 1987,2 vols.). __1986-9 Ontglipt verleden. Verhaal van mijn iaren in een wereld die voorbijging. Franeker: Wever, 2 vols. Boele van Hensbroek, P.A.M. 1875. De beoefening der Oostersche talen in Nederland en zijne overzeesche bezittingen 1800-1874. Leiden: E.J. Brill. Bork-Feltkamp, A.J. van. 1938. Anthropological Research in the Netherlands. Historical Survey at the Request of the Committee for the Physical-Anthropological Investigation of the Dutch Population. Verhandelingen der KNAW, Afd. Natuurkunde, tweede sectie, 37(3), Amsterdam. __1955. The Netherlands and Belgium: An Anthropological Review for 1952-1954. In: W.L. Thomas, Jr. (ed.), Yearbook of Anthropology, 541-61. New York: Wenner-Gren Constandse-Westennann, T.S. 1983. History of Physical Anthropology in the Netherlands. Newcastle-upon-Tyne (International Association of Human Biologists, Occasional Papers, vol. 1, no. 3). Claessen, H.J.M. 1979. De Goede Wilde en de Ware Mens. Verre Naasten Nader-bij, 13(3): 71-78. ___1982. Dejonge jaren. In: G. Banck & B. van Heijningen (eds.), Beroep:Antropoloog. Vreemde volken. visies en vooroordelen., 1-12. Amsterdam!Brussel: Intermediair. Drewes, G.W.J. 1957 Oriental Studies in the Netherlands. Higher Education and Research in the Netherlands, 1(4): 3-13 (Selected Bibliography of Oriental Studies, by E.M. Uhlenbeck, ibid., 38-42). Eerde, J.C. van. 1923 A Review of the Ethnological Investigations in the Dutch Indian Archipelago. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Akademie van W etenschappen, Internationale Circumpacifische Onderzoekcommissie (ICO-Commissie), part Ill, 3-30. Ellen, R.F. 1976 The Development of Anthropology and Colonial Policy in the Netherlands: 1800- 1960. Journal of the History ofthe Behavioral Sciences 12(4): 303-24. Fahrenfort, J.J. 1933 Steinmetz als ethnoloog. Mensch en Maatschappii, 9: 11-16. ___1963 S.R. Steinmetz als volkenkundige. Mensch en Maatschappij, 38:24-32. Fasseur, C. 1993. De Indologen. Ambtenaren voor de Oost 1825-1950. Amsterdam: Bert BOakker.

Feddema, H. & O.D. van den Muijzenberg. 1978 Koloniale belangen in de academie. In: F. Bovenkerk et al. (eds.), Toen en Thans. De sociale wetenschappen in de jaren dertig en nu., Baam:Ambo. Fischer, H.Th .. 1936 De modeme ethnologie als historische wetenschap. Groningen/Batavia: J.B. Wohers. -:--:---- 1938 Ethnologie. In: Scientia. Vol. II,135-80. Zeist: W. denHaan. Gerbrands, A.A. 1953. The Netherlands and Belgium. In: W.L. Thomas Jr. & A.M. Pikelis (eds.), Internati-onal Directory of Anthropological Institutions, 153-62. New York: Wenner-Gren Foundation __....,1959. La situation actuelle de l'anthropologie culturelle en Hollande. In: Cahiers de 1'Institut de Science Economique ApplimuSe, Serle M: Recherches et Dialogues Philosophiques et Economi-ques, No.5, 115-38. Paris. Held, G.J. 1953. Applied Anthropology in Government: The Netherlands. In: A.L. Kroeber (ed.), Anthropology Today: An Encyclopedic Inventory, 866-79. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Herskovits, M.J. 1946. Anthropology During the War: IV. Belgium and Holland. American Anthropologig, 48(2): 301-04. Heslinga, M.W. 1975 Opvattingen van geografie. Encyclopedie van de sociale geografie. Amsterdam: Geografisch en Planologisch Instituut van de Vrije Universiteit.

11 Hirano, T. 1975. A Short History of Ethnology in the Netherlands. Memoirs of the Faculty of Education, Niigata University, Nagaoka 17: 176-89. Jaarsma, S.R. 1984. Structuur:: Realiteit. Kernelementen van de Leidse antropologie in theorie en prnktijk tussen de jaren twintig en viiftig. Leiden: ICA Publicatie 66. Jongmans, D.G. 1976 Wat ste1t Nederland voor op het terrein van de toegepaste antropo1ogie? In: Peter Kloos (ed.), Culturele antropologie: portret van een wetenschap, 35-48. Meppel: Boom. Josselin de Jong, J.P.B. de. 1935 De Maleische archipel als ethno1ogisch studieveld. Leiden: J. Ginsberg. ___c.1938 Het ontstaan van de wetenschappelijke ethnologie (The origin of scientific ethnology). Stencilled lecture notes. Oegstgeest. Josselin de Jong, P.E. de. 1960. Cultural Anthropology in the Netherlands. Higher Education and Research in the Netherlands, 4(4): 13-26. ___. 1972. Marcel Mauss et les origines de l'anthropologie structurale hollandaise. L'Homme, 12(4): 62-84. ___.1977 Structural Anthropology in the Netherlands. In: P.E. de Josselin de Jong (ed.}, Structural Anthropology in the Netherlands: A Reader, 1-29. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff ___.. 1980. The Netherlands: Structuralism before Levi-Strauss. In: S. Diamond (ed.), Anthropology: Ancestors and Heirs, 143-57. The Hague/Paris: Mouton. Josselin de Jong, P.E. de & H.F. Vermeulen. 1989 Cultural Anthropology at Leiden University: From Encyclopedism to Structuralism. In: W. Otterspeer (ed.}, Leiden Oriental Connections. 1850-1940, 280-316. Leiden: E.J. Brill Kennedy, R. 1944. Applied Anthropology in the Dutch East Indies. Transactions ofthe New York Academy of Sciences, Series 2, Vl(5): 157-62. -----'.1945. Bibliography oflndonesian Peoples and Cultures. New Haven: Yale University Press (rev. edn. by Th.W. Maretzki & H.Th. Fischer in 2 vols., New Haven 1955). Koentjaraningrat. 1975. Anthropology of Indonesia. A Bibliographical Review. The Hague:Martinus Nijhoff Kloos, P. 1975. Anthropology and Non-Western Sociology in the Netherlands. In: P. Kloos and Henri J.M. Claessen (eds.), Current Anthropology in the Netherlands, Rotterdam: NSAV!The Hague: Ministerie van Onderwijs en Wetenschappen. ___. 1977. Culturele antropologie in Nederland. In: Annemarie de Waal Malefijt, Beelden van de mens. Geschiedenis van de culturele antropologie, 269-82. Baarn: Ambo Basisboeken. ___.. 1981. Themes ofthe 'Seventies': Anthropology in the Netherlands 1970-1980. In: P. Kloos and H.J.M. Claessen (eds.), Current Issues in Anthropology: The Netherlands, 9-35. Rotterdam: NSAV ___..1987. L'Anthropologie des annees 80 aux Pays-Bas. Anthropologie et Societes 11(3): 11- 34. ___.1988. Het ontstaan van een discipline: de sociologic der niet-westerse volken. In: P. Hovens & L. Triebels (eds.), special issue of Antropologische Verkenningen, 7(1/2): 123-46. ___..1989. The Sociology of Non-Western Societies: The Origins of a Discipline. The Netherlands Journal ofthe Social Sciences, 25(1): 40-50. ___..1991. Anthropology in the Netherlands: The 1980s and Beyond. In: P. Kloos & H.J.M. Claessen (eds.}, Contemporary AnthrQPology in the Netherlands. The Use of Anthropological Ideas, 1-29. Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij. Kobben, AJ.F. 1988. J.J. Fahrenfort (1885-1975). In: P. Hovens & L. Triebels (eds.), Historische ontwikkelingen in de Nederlandse antropologie. Antropologische Verkenningen, 7(1/2): 75- 94. __.1992 Sebald Rudolf Steinmetz (1862-1940). In: J.CR. Blom et al. (eds.}, Een brandpunt van geleerdheid in de 313-40. Hilversum/Amsterdam __.1996 S.R. Steinmetz. Facta, 4(2): 10-12.

12 __.1998 J.J. Fahrenfort. In: J. Goudsblom et al. (eds.), In de Zevende, 50-67. Amsterdam: Het Spinhuisocher, Locher, G.W. 1978a. Transformation and Tradition and Other Essays. The Hague: Martinus Nijho:ff. ___.. 1978b De etnologie van de jaren dertig: Het Leidse perspectief. In: F. Bovenkerk et al. (eds.), Toen en Thans, 80-94. Baarn: Ambo. ___.. 1978c Honderd jaar volkenkunde aan de Leidse Universiteit. Leiden: ICA-Publicatie 30. __..1981 Structural Anthropology and History. In: G.A. Moyer, D.S. Moyer & P.E. de Josselin de Jong (eds.), The Nature ofStructure, 11-25" Leiden: ICAPublication45. ___.. 1982. The Reactions ofFranz Boas and Konrad Theodor Preuss to a Structural Interpretation of Kwakiutl Mythology in 1933. In: P.E. de Josselin de Jong and E. Schwimmer (eds.), Symbolic Anthropology in the Netherlands, 30-42. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. ___.. 1988 J.P.B. de Josselin de Jong en het Leidse structuralisme. In: P. Hovens & L.F. Triebels (eds.), Historische ontwikkelingen in de Nederlandse antropologie. Antropologische Verkenningen, 7 (1/2): 51-74. ___. 1990. From Museum to University: The Scientific Career of Adrian A.Gerbrands. In: P. ter Keurs & D. Smidt (eds.), The Language ofThings: Studies in Ethnocommunication, 13-22. Leiden: Rijksmuseum voor Volkenkunde. Schrieke, B.J.O. 1948 (ed.), Report of the Scientific Work done in the Nederlands on behalf of the Dutch Overseas Territories during the period between approximately 1918 and 1943. Amsterdam: Noord-Hollandsche Uitgevers Maatschappij. Steinmetz, S.R. 1917a. Geschiedenis der volkenkunde. In: Geschiedenis der wetenschappen, 2:221- 44. Baarn: HollandiaDrukkerij ___.1917b. Geschiedenis der sociologie. In: Geschiedenis derwetenschappen 2:245-56.

SchoorL J.W. 1967a. Ontwikkelingssociologie en sociologie der niet-westerse volken. Universiteit en Hogeschool13(5): 366-77. ___.1967b. The Anthropologist in Government Service. In: D.G. Jongmans & P.C.W. Gutkind (eds.), Anthropologists in the FielQ, 170-92. Assen: Van Gorcum. ___.1970. Sociology of Development: Focus of a New Profession. Sociologica 6(2): 175-83. __.1996 (ed.), Besturen in Nederlands-Nieuw-Guinea 1945-1962. Ontwikkelingswerk in een periode van politieke onrust. Lei den: KITL V Uitgeverij. Tiele, P.A.1884 Nederlandsche Bibliographie van Land- en Volkenkunde. Amsterdam: F. Muller.

Toit, Brian M. du. 1975 The Development and Profession of Anthropology in the Netherlands. Paper for the 74th annual meetings of the American Anthropological Association in San Francisco. Warmenhoven, A.J.J. 1977 De opleiding van Nederlandse bestuursambtenaren in Indonesie. In: S.L. van der Wal (ed.), Besturen overzee. Herinneringen van oud-arnbtenaren bij het binnenlands bestuur in Nederlandsch-Indie, 12-41. Franker: T. Wever Wol£ J.J. de, S.R Jaarsma & P. Hovens 1991 Biographies of van Baal, Fahrenfort, Fischer, de Josselin de Jong, Kamma, ten Kate, Kohlbrugge, Kruyt, Rassers, Serrurier, Steinmetz, Veth, Vroklage and Wilken. In: C. Winters (ed.), International Dictionary of Anthropologists. New York: Garland. ll. Recent Dissertations (Ph.D. except where otherwise indicated)

H. Augustin (University College, London, 1996), "Anthropology and the rise of racial theory."

13 Tina Campf (Cornell Univiversity, 1996), 'Afro-Germans': The convergence of race, sexuality, and gender in the formation of a German ethnic identity (1919-1960)."

Lisa Gates (Harvard University, 1996) "Images of Africa in late 19th and 20th century German literature and culture."

Christopher Kenway (UCLA, 1997) , "Kraft und SchOenheit: Regeneration and racial theory in the German physical culture movement, 1895-1920."

Catherine Lavender (University of Colorado, Boulder, 1997), "Storytellers: Feminist ethnography and the American Southwest, 1900-1940."

Andreas Motsch (University of 1997), "Lafitau et 1' emergence du discours ethnogrnphique."

Oliver, Robert (Vanderbilt University, 1997), "Sex, anger, and confusion: The use of Freudian theory by American historians and anthropologists."

Jane Sequoya (Stanford University, 1997), "'The symbolic functions of the figure of the Indian for the modem imagination.

Charles Stuart (University ofHawaii, 1996), "Blue spots, idiots, baxbarians and tiffin in the dark heart of Asia: Mongols in Western consciousness."

Ill. Recent Work by Subscribers

[Except in the case of new subscnbers, for whom we will include one or two orienting items, "recent" is taken to mean within the last two years. Please note that we do not list "forthcoming" items. To be certain of dates and page numbers, please wait until your works have actually appeared before sending offprints (preferably) or citations in the style used in History of Anthropology and most anthropological journals]

Dias, Nelia. 1998. The visibility of difference: Nineteenth-century French anthropological collections. In Sharon Macdonald, ed., The politics of display: Museums, science, culture, 36-52. London: Routledge 1998. Une science nouvelle? La geo-ethnographie de Jomard. In L'invention scientifique de la Mediterranee. Paris: Ed. de l'EHESS, 159-83.

Erickson, Paul, with L.D. Murphy. 1998. A history of anthropological theory. Peterborough, Ont.: Broadview Press.

Gaillard, Gerald. 1998. Tendances de l'ethnologie :fran¢se. Les sources de l'ethnologie In M.-0. Geraud, 0. Leservoisier & R Pottier, Les notion cles de l'ethnologie: Analyses et 163-76. Paris: Armand Colin.

Kuper, Adam. 1997. On human nature: Darwin and the anthropologists. In M. Teich et al., eds., Nature and society in historical context, 274-90. Cambridge University Press.

14 Mauviel, Maurice. 1997. L'anthropologie franvaise naissante a la fin du xviiieme siecle. Paper presented to colloquium 'Les limites de siecles' to be published by the Presse de l'Universite de Besanyon, spring 1998.

Modell, Judith. 1997. From ethnographies to encounters: Differences and others. Journal of Interdisciplinary History 27:481-95.

Rutsch, Mechthild. 1997. ' ... escribirle cuando siento mi coraz6n cerca de estallar': La concepcion de ciencia, etica y educaci6n en la correspondencia de Ezequiel A Chavez y Franz Boas. In Rutsch and C. Serrano Sanchez, eds. Ciencia en los Margines: Ensayos de historia de las ciencias en Mexico, 127-66. Mexico: Universidad Nacional Aut6noma de Mexico [contains also essays on Mexican archeology and linguistics by other authors]

Vermeulen, Han F. 1997. Van Instituut voor CA en SNWV tot Vakgroep CA/SNWS (1955-1997). Professionalisering van de antropo-sociologie in Lei den. In: H.J .M. Claessen and H.F. Vermeulen (eds.), Veertig jaren onderweg. Lezingen gehouden op de eerste alumnidag van de vakgroep Culturele Antrqpologie en Sociologie der Niet-Westerse Samenlevingen te Leiden, 13-52._ Leiden: DSWO Press (Sociaal Antropologische Studien 12).

_____. 1998. Anthropology in colonial contexts. The second Kamchatka expedition (1733- 1767) and the Danish-German Arabia expedition (1761-67). In Jan van Bremen & Akitoshi Shimizu, eds., Anthropology and colonialism in Asia and Oceania: Comparative and historical permectives, 13-39. Richmond: Curzon Press.

IV. Suggested by our Readers

[Although the subtitle does not indicate it, the assumption here is the same as in the preceding section: we list "recent" work-i.e., items appearing in the last several years. Entries without initials were contributed by G.W.S. Occasionally, readers call our attention to errors in the entries, usually of a minor typographical character. Typing the entries is a burdensome task (undertaken normally by G.W.S.), and under the pressure of getting HAN out, some proofreading errors occasionally slip by. For these we offer a blanket apology, but will not normally attempt corrections. Once again, we call attention to the listings in the Bulletin of the History of Archaeology, the entries in the annual bibliographies of Isis, and those in the Bulletin d'information de la SFHSH [Societe francaise pour l'histoire des sciences de l'homme]--each of which takes information from HAN, as we do from them--although selectively]

Ashmore, Malcolm. 1997. Fraud by numbers: Quantitative rhetoric in the Piltdown forgery discovery. In B. Hernstein-Smith & A Plotnitsky, eds., Mathematics, science and postclassical theory., 189-211. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.

Bahn, Paul. G., ed. 1996. The Cambridge illustrated history of archaeology. Cambridge University Press [AL.C.]

Bell, Brenda. 1996. The contribution of Julius Caesar to the vocabulary of ethnography. Latomus 55:753-67.

Blackburn, F. M. & R.A.Williamson 1997. Cowboys and cave dwellers: Basketmaker archaeology in Utah's Grand Gulch. Santa Fe: School of American Research [well-illustrated popular account ofthe Wetherill-Orand Gulch Research Project-A.L.C.]

15 Bouse, Derek. 1996. Culture as nature: How native American cultural antiquities became part of the natural world. Public History 18(4):75-98.

Braude, Benjamin. 1997. The sons ofNoah and the construction of ethnic and geographical identities in the medieval and early modem periods. William and Mary Quarterly 54:103-42.

Bremen, Jan van, and Akitoshi Shimizu (eds.), 1998. Anthropology and colonialism in Asia and Oceania: Comparative and historical perspectives. London: Curzon Press [HV.]

Campbell, Mary. 1996. Anthropometarnorphosis: John Bulwer's monsters of cosmetoloty and the science of culture. In Jeffrey Cohen, ed., Monster theory: Reading culture. University of Minnesota Press.

Carey, Daniel. 1997. Compiling nature's history: Travelers and travel narratives in the early Royal society. Annals of Science 54:269-92.

Chaplin, Joyce. 1997. Natural philosophy and an early racial idiom in North America: Comparing English and Indian bodies. William and Mary Quarterly 54: 229-52.

Claessen, Henri J.M. 1997. The Merry Maidens ofMatavai. A survey of the views of eighteenth- century participant observers and moralists. Biidragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 153(2): 183-210 [H.V.]

Conklin, Alice. 1996. A mission to civilize: The Repu8blican idea of empire in France and West Africa, 1895-1930. Stanford University Press.

Crepon, Marc. 1996. Les geographies de !'esprit: Enquete sur la caracterisation des peuples de Leibniz a Hegel. Paris: Payot.

Cuche, Denys. 1996. La notion de culture dans les sciences sociales. Paris: La Decouverte.

Delisle, Richard. 1998. Les origines de la paleontologic humaine: Essai de reinterpretion. L'Anthropologie 2:3-19.

Essner, Cornelia. 1995. Qui sera 'juif? La classification 'raciale' nazie, des 'lois de Nuremberg' ala 'conference de Wannsee.' Geneses 21:4-28.

Fitzhugh, William. 1997. Ambassadors in sealskins: Exhibiting Eskimos at the Smishonian. In Am Henderson & A Kaeepler, eds., Exhibiting dilemmas: Issues of representation at the Smithso!llim, 206-45. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Frank, Tibor. 1995. Franz Boas es a kozep- es del-europai kivandorlas antropol616giaja'. [Franz Boas and the anthropology of U.S. immigration from the Austro-Hungarian monarchy]. Ethnographia CVI (1):155-93 [RB.]

Galloway, Patricia, ed. 1997. The Hernando de Soto expedition: History, historiograchy and 'discovery' in the Southeast. Lincoln: University ofNebraska Press [R.D.F.]

Ginkel, Rob van. 1997. Notities over Nederlanders. Antropologische reflecties. Amsterdarn/Meppel: Boom [Includes Dutch translation (pp. 87-97) & the original version of Ruth Benedict's

16 'Note on Dutch Behavior' (225-234); two chapters on her study of Dutch 'national character' & review ofliterature under the title 'Ethnologia Neerlandica' (199-223) [H.V.]

Goodenough, Ward. 1995. John Milton Roberts, December 8, 1916-April 2, 1990. Biographical Memoirs ofthe National Academy ofSciences 67:331-43.

Gupta, Akhil & J. Ferguson. 1997. Anthropological locations: Boundaries and grounds of a field science. Berkeley: University of California Press [includes essays on the fieldwork tradition & changing subfields in anthropology]

Hall, Jonathan. 1997. Ethnic identity in Greek anqyity. Cambridge University Press.

Hall, Kim. 1995. Things of darkness: Economies of race and gender in early modem England. Ithaca: Cornell University.

Harms, Volker. 1997. 'What Hitler did to them!' Kritische Anmerkungen zur bisherigen Bearbeitungen des Themas ethnologie und Nazionalsozialmus am Beispiel des 'Falles' Julius Lips. Sociologus n.f. 47(1):78-96. Berlin [W.C.S.]

Harvey, Joy. 1997. 'Almost a man of genius': Clemence Royer, feminism, and 19th-century science. New Brunswick, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

Hieb, L. A. 1997. The beginnings of ethnology at Hopi. In Layers oftime: Papers in honor of Robert H. Weber, ed. M.S. Duran & D. T. Kirkpatrick, 37-50. Papers of the Archaeological Society of New Mexico 23 [information on Jeremiah Sullivan, contemporary of Alexander Stephen-A.L.C.]

Bittman, Michael. 1998. Wovoka and the Ghost Dance. Expanded edition, researched, compiled and written by Michael Hittman, ed. Don Lynch. Lincoln: U. ofNebraska Press [R.D.F.]

Jacques, Carolos. From savages and barbarians to primitives: Africa, social typologies and history in 18th century French philosophy. History and Theory 36:190-215.

Jann, Rosemary. 1996. Darwin and the anthropolgists: Sexual selection and its discourses. In A. Miller & J. Adams, eds., Sexualities in Victorian BriliDn, 79-95. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Johnson, Christopher. 1997. Anthropology and the sciences humaines: The voice ofUvi-Strauss. History ofthe Human Sciences 10(3):122-33.

Joseph, John. 1996. The immediate sources of the 'Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Historiographia Linguistica. 23:365-404.

Klatt, Norbert. 1998. Verflucht, Versklavt, Verketzert. Der verruBte Cham als Stammvater der Neger [Cursed, enslaved, hereticized. Sooted Ham as progenitor of the blacks]. Gottingen: Norbert Klatt Verlag, 287 pp. [Profound study ofthe development of the legend ofHam and its use in Jewish, Christian and Muslim discourses to justify slavery ofblack people-H.V.]

Kohn, Marek. 1995. The race gallery: The return of racial science. London: Cape.

17 Lange, F.W. 1995. Samuel K. Lothrop y la arquelogia de Costa Rica. Vinculos. Revista de Antropologia del Museo Nacional de CostaRica21 (1-2):1-16 [W.C.S.]

Leinss, Gerhard. 1995. Japanische Anthropologie: Die Nature des Menschen in der konfuzianischen Neoklassik am Anfang des 18. Jahrhunderts: Jinsdai und Sorai. Weisbaden: Harrassowitz.

Leuser, Claudia. 1996. Theology und Anthropologie: Die Erziehung des Menschengeschlechts bei Johann Gottfiied Herder. Frankfurt: Lang.

Lister, Florence. 1997. Pot Luck; Adventures in Archaeology. Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press [A.L.C.]

Llobera, Josep. 1996. The fate of anthroposociology in L' Annee Sociologique. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford 27(3 ):235-51.

Lorimer, Douglas. 1997. Science and the secularization ofVictorian images of race. In B. LightJ:nan, ed., Victorian science in Context, 212-35. University of Chicago Press.

Mader, Brigitta. 1996. Anthropologie und Prahistorie: Die Zusammenarbeit der Naturhistorischen Museen in Wien und Trieste im Lichte des Briefwechsels von Josef Szombathy und Carlo de Marchesetti (1885-1920). Annalen des Naturhistorischen Museums in Wien 97A:145-66

Magnus, Olaus. [1996]. Historia de gentibus septentrionalibus, vol. 1. Trans. & ed. By Peter Fisher and Humphrey Higgens. London: Hakluyt Society.

Malchow, H.L. 1996. Gothic images of race in 19th century Britain. Stanford University Press.

Marcus, George 1997. The use of complicity in the changing mise-en-scene of anthropological fieldwork. Representations 59:85-108.

Matthey, Piero. 1996. A glimpse of Evans-Pritchard through his correspondence with Lowie and Kroeber. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Oxford 27:21-45.

Morgan, Jennifer. 197. 'Some could suckle over their shoulder': Male travelers, female bodies, and the gendering of racial ideology, 1500-1770. William and Mary Quarterly 54: 167-92.

Miillauer-Seicbter, W. 1997. Julio Caro Baroja (1914-1995). Spurensuche nach einem Pionier der spanischen Kulturanthropologie. Mitteilungen der Anthropolischen Gesellschaft im Wien 127:135-47 [W.C.S.]

Muller, E.W. 1996. L'Etudiant noir, negritude et racisme: Critique d'une critique. Anthrooos 91:5- 18.

Pagden, Anthony. 1996. History and anthropology, and the history of anthropology: Considerations on a methodological practice. In J. Hart, ed., Imagining cuhure: Essays in early modem history and literature. New York: Garland.

Pareti, Gennana. 1996. Un positivista di casa nostra: Cesare Lombroso. Rivista di Filisofia 37: 385- 91.

18 Peace, William. 1998. Bernhard Stem, Leslie A. White, and an anthropological appraisal of the Russian Revolution. American Anthropologist 100:84-93.

Price, David. 1998. Cold war anthropology: Collaborators and victims of the national security state. Identities 4: 1-42.

Rodseth, Lars. 1998. Distributive models of culture: A Sapirian alternative to essentialism. American Anthropologist 100:55-69.

Rony, Fatimah. 1996. The third eye: Race. cinema and ethnographic spectacle. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.

Rosa, Frederico. 1996. Le 'mouvement anthropologique' et se representants franvais Archives Europeenes des Socio1ogie 37:375-405.

Sakano, Torn. 1996. Japanese anthropologists in 'the South': On anthropological research in Micronesia before World War II [in Japanese]. Kagakusi Kenkyu 35:239-50.

Salazar, P-J. 1997. Rhetorique de 1a race: L'Afrrique Australe au xviiie siecle. Rhetorica 15:151-65.

Sayre, Gordon. 1997. Les sauvages Americains: Representations of native Americans in French and English colonial literature. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

Schlichtenberger, Clara. 1998. Die Ordnung der Welt. Die Sammlyngs-Grammati.k Victor Goldschmidts, des Griinders der volkerkundlichen Sammlung der von Portheim-Stiftung in Heidelberg, und die seiner Kuratoren. Pfaffenweiler. Centaurus (Kulturen im Wandel 8) [Extended version ofPh.D. thesis, University ofTiibingen, Germany, on the collector Victor Goldschmidt(l853-1933)-H.V.].

Schneider, William. 1996. The history of research on blood group genetics: Initial discovery and diffusion. History and Philoosopby ofthe Life Sciences 18:277-303.

Schrager, Cynthia. 1996. Both sides ofthe veil: Race, science, and mysticism in W.E.B.Dubois. American Quarterly 48:5 51-86.

Shoemaker, Nancy. 1997. How Indians got to be red. American Historical Review 102: 625-44.

S1ezkine, Yuri. 1996. Marr and the national origins of Soviet ethnogenetics. Slavic Review 55: 826- 62.

Strack, Thomas. 1996. Alexander von Humbo1dts Ethnographic. In Helwig Schmidt-Glintzer, ed., Fordern und Bewahren: Studien zur europaischen Kulturgeschichte der Friihen Neuzeit 197-211. Weisbaden: Harrassowitz.

Trouwborst, Albert A. 1996. Snouck Hurgronje (1857-1936). Facta. Sociaal-Wetenschappelijk Magazine 4(2): 6- 9 [H.V.]

______1997 Antropologie en politiek: Rwanda, Burundi en Atjeh. In: Henri J.M. Claessen & Han F. Vermeulen (eds.), Veertig jaren onderweg. Leiden: DSWO Press, pp. 83- 98 [H.V.]

19 Vidal, Fernando. 1996. Anthropologie et psychology dans les Encyclop¢dies de d'Yverdon et de Paris: Esquisse de comparaison. Annales Benjamin Constant 18/19: 139-51.

Visweswaran, Kamala. 1988. Race and the culture of anthropology. American Anthropologist 100: 70-83.

Wemhart, Karl. 1997. Walter Hirschberg (1904-1996). Leben und Werk eines Anthropolgen (mit Bibliographie). Mitteilungen der Anthropolischen Gesellschaftim Wien 127:1-20 [W.C.S.]

Young, Robert. 1995. Colonial desire: Hybridity in theory, culture, and mce. London: Routledge.

AL.C. = Andrew L. Christenson R B. = Robert Beider H.V. = Han Vermeulen RD. F. = Raymond Fogelson W.C.S. = William C. Sturtevant

GLEANINGS FROM ACADEMIC GATHERINGS

Cheiron-At the June 1998 meeting at the University of San Diego, there are to be two sessions on topics in the history of anthropology. "Anthropologists, Empires and Indigenous Peoples" will include papers by David Hoyt (UCLA) "Indirect rule in the British Empire as Analogue to Structural-Functionalism in Pre-WWI Britain"; Andrew Zimmerman (UCSD) ''Natural Humans and Human Nature: Berlin Anthropology and the Humanities"; and Audra Wolfe (U. Penn.) '"The Human Diversity Genome Project and the Tradition of 'Salvage anthropology"'. A symposium on anthropology and history will include papers by John Gilkeson (Ariz. St. U., West) "Kroeber and 'Style' in the Natural History of Civilizations"; Clifford Wilcox (Bolles School, Jacksonville) ''Redfield and the Interwar Debate over Culture and Civilization"; and Willow Roberts Powers (U. New Mex.) ''Fields for Thought: Anthropology and History."

Torres Straits Expedition-A conference entitled "Anthropology And Psychology: The Legacy Of The Torres Strait Expedition (1898-1998)" is scheduled for August 10-12 at St John's College Cambridge. The opening session on ''Psychology, Anthropology, The Genealogy Of Science Studies" will include papers by David Bloor, Diederick Raven, and Simon Schaffer. A session on W.HR Rivers "as psychiatrist" will include papers by Roland Littlewood and Allan Young. Henrika Kuklick and Keith Hart will offer papers on "Rivers as Anthropologist." Anita Herle and Jude Philp will present a paper on '"The continuing significance of the Expedition's work for the Torres Straits Islanders" Two sessions on "Case Studies In The Relation Between Anthropology And Psychology" will include papers by Graham Richards, Alan and Barbara Saunders. The final session on "Anthropology And Psychology: Prospect And Retrospect" will include papers by Michael Cole and Gillian Gillison. Further information may be obtained from Paul Caldwell, Department of Social Anthropology, Free School Lane, Cambridge CB2 3RF.

20