ILONA SALOMAA RAFAEL KARSTEN (1879-1956) AS A FINNISH SCHOLAR OF RELIGION THE LIFE AND CAREER OF A MAN OF SCIENCE Academic dissertation to be publicly discussed, by due permission of the Faculty of Arts at the University of Helsinki in auditorium XII, on the 4th of May, 2002 at 10 o´ clock. ISBN 952-91-4423-7 (volume) ISBN 952-10-0409-6 (PDF) The University Press, Helsinki 3 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The present study has benefited enormously from the help and support of various people and institutions to whom I am greatly obliged. I regret that it is impossible to name here all who have helped me. I gratefully acknowledge the assistance, advice, criticism and patience of the following people: Professor Juha Pentikäinen, Professor René Gothóni, Professor Emeritus Åke Hultkrantz (Sweden), Docent Christer Lindberg (Sweden), Dr. Kirsti Suolinna, Lic.Phil. Riku Hämäläinen, Marja Jalava MA, Dr. Tom Sjöblom, Dr. Anja Nygren, Eva Karsten MA (Sweden), the late Rolf Karsten, Mrs. Maggie Karsten-Sveander (Sweden), Satu Hietanen MA, Päivi Ritvo, M.Ed., and the personnel of the Helsinki University Library, the Gothenburg Ethnographical Museum, the Gothenburg University Archives, and the British Library. My best thanks are also due to Virginia Mattila MA and Marjut Heinonen MA for correcting the manuscript as regards language, and for most valuable help in regarding the proofs. Any mistakes which remain are, of course, my own. Lastly, I add my sincere thanks for my family and friends.You have made the writing of this study a true journey of personal discovery, that is, the moments of delight and despair which you have shared with me have not always been the easiest. First of all, thanks to my husband Tuukka and my six-year-old daughter Silja, who has promised not to be a researcher in her future. I express my deepest gratitude also to my parents Eila and Mikko Joutsi, who, like my husband, have done the most strenuous part in coping with me during these years. I extend these thanks also to my parents-in-law Riitta-Liisa and Juhani Salomaa and to my aunts Ms. Irkka Joutsi, M.Sc. Hilkka Alkio and Mrs. Pirkko Siltanen and their families. Lastly, my best thanks go to Milja, Kikka, Eveliina, Eija, Anne, Elina, Tuija & Ben, Teija & Riku, Leena, Anne, and Annukka (the great group of social psychologists) and last but not least to Sami, my very best friend. The research for this book was funded principally by grants from the Emil Aaltonen Foundation and the Finnish Konkordia Foundation. 4 CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Aim and Background of the Study 5 1.2. Previous Studies 7 1.3. Framing the Problem 12 1.4. Methods of Investigation 15 1.4.1. Hermeneutic Understanding of Historical Religious Material 15 1.4.2. The Study of the Spiritual Growth of an Individual 24 1.5. Material of the Study 32 2. RAFAEL KARSTEN´S SPIRITUAL GROWTH IN TERMS OF HIS BIOGRAPHY 2.1. The Intellectual Heritage of Childhood Home 43 2.2. Rafael Karsten´s Spiritual Growth and Life 52 2.3. Post Scriptum 95 3. THE TERMS OF REFERENCE OF RAFAEL KARSTEN´S COMPARATIVE RELIGION 3.1. The Profession 95 3.2. The System 104 3.3. Brief Abstract 174 4. RAFAEL KARSTEN´S THEORETICAL UNDERSTANDING OF COMPARATIVE RELIGION 1900-1910 4.1. Article 174 4.2. Doctoral thesis 185 4.3. The Polemic on the Doctrine and Institutions of Christianity 198 4.3.1. Society 198 4.3.2. Book 216 4.4. Brief Abstract 244 5. RAFAEL KARSTEN AND THE TESTING OF A THEORY 1911-1956 5.1. Terra Incognita and Amerindian Religions 245 5.1.1. Selecting the Site 245 5.1.2. An Ethnologist at Work 255 5.1.3. Testing a Theory 271 5.2. The Religion of the Samek 294 5.2.1. Background 294 5.2.2. Main Principles 297 5.3. Brief Abstract 307 6. CONCLUSION - The Meaning of Rafael Karsten´s Conception of Religion for His Comparative Religion 308 SOURCES AND LITERATURE APPENDICES 5 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1. Aim and Background of the Study The purpose of this study is to comprehensively analyse Rafael Karsten (1879-1956) as a Finnish scholar of religion, an aspect which has gone almost unnoticed. I say “comprehensively” because of my Descartesian inclination to make my studies so inclusive that I can be sure that I have taken into account all that is essential and relevant (René Descartes in Discours de la méthode, 1637) (1). I believe in details, as did Rafael Karsten and Edward Westermarck one hundred years ago. I believe in the ultimate meaning of matter, as the Swedish scholar Christer Lindberg who urged me very early in my study to “dig up” everything necessary as thoroughly as possible. I believe that via the details I am on my way to profound understanding. To some people this may sound megalomaniac, for me it only means a precise and conscientious historical analysis. In the first place, Rafael Karsten has a widespread reputation as a researcher of South American indigenous cultures. Today, his contribution to our knowledge of South American Indians is considered wide-ranging and valuable. Although Rafael Karsten is known as a sociologist and a philosopher he is, in my opinion, best known as a scholar of religion as this depicts his scholarly career most accurately. Rafael Karsten and his theoretical constructs was relegated to an inferior position after World War II. Gradually, Karsten became a humanistic classic and a household name, but was in spite of that a truly forgotten figure. The fundamental reason for the neglect was the rapidly changing climate of the scholarly world. After World War II, modern Parsonian functionalism arrived in Finland. Then, the sociologists were interested in events and features inside industrializing society. After the war, crime statistics showed a worrying rise in violent crime. It was not only a job for the police, but also an obligation of social scientists to prevent crimes. The war meant an enormous change in Finnish society and its individual members since the hostilities not only created a general need but also re-wrote many individual stories which could be called personal tragedies. The war made many people change their philosophies of life while the fundamental questions were how to ensure permanent peace in the world, an efficient security policy, and economic primary protection. This tendency was also reflected in Finnish ethnology and comparative religion. Inevitably, the days of exotic travels were a thing of the past. As a result, sociologists and anthropologists turned their interest to the inner structures of Finnish society. During the last two decades, in the 1980s and 1990s, the scholarly literature on Rafael Karsten has increased. This increase indicates a growing interest in Rafael Karsten´s lifework (and the Westermarckian school) among the older and the younger generation of contemporary scholars. This scholarly interest may be understood as a revival. Yet, although Rafael Karsten´s scholarly figure has undergone a subtle restoration, little attention has been paid to him as a scholar of religion. What is it in our time that has re-awakened the scholars´ interest 6 in the old Westermarckians? The answer probably lies in the intellectual and ideological transition which has taken place in Finland in the recent years. The fantasy and complexity of postmodernism has disconnected the scholars from their academic past. Gradually, the importance of knowing how one´s subject area originated has gained popularity and the search for academic identity and roots has began. However, the enormous work of restoring the academic work of the Westermarckian school is still in its infancy and the reputation of many of his disciples is still quite modest. Paradoxically, many modern authors, like anthropologists writing on marriage and morality, share the same research topic and even results with the old Westermarckians, but, consciously or unconsciously, deny this fact. They probably have not realized how much in common their studies in reality have with the works of the Westermarckian school. I believe that the lapse of memory and the prolonged unpopularity of the Westermarckian dogma among the academic public has been so deep-rooted that modern anthropologists and scholars of religion are still hesitant to admit their scholarly common ground with Westermarckian sociology. We must recall, however, that today the lectures and textbooks on learning the sciences of sociology, anthropology, and comparative religion tend to begin with Malinowski and Durkheim, ignoring all previous aspects. I believe there are three reasons for the ignorance towards Rafael Karsten and his lifework. Firstly, the general reluctance regarding the Westermarckian circle has not favoured Karsten´s works. Secondly, Karsten´s lifework was emphasized by the study of religion in the small-scale societies of South America. For many decades South America as a research interest was considered remote and uninspiring among the Finnish academic circles. As late as 1977, the desirable field research sites within the Finnish study of religions were India, the Middle East, Africa and the Arctic (2). Amazingly, Rafael Karsten, for almost one hundred years, was the only Finnish scholar of religion to conduct field investigations on South American indigenous cultures and collect valuable field material. Only a couple of years ago, the Finnish scholar of religion, Petri Salonperä, undertook a field expedition to Chile to study the cultural customs and religion of the Mapuche Indians. Thirdly, Rafael Karsten´s controversial position in the Westermarckian school has caused scholars see him only as a “polemical” or “critical” person. I build here on the dogmas of personality psychology which suggests that epithets like “polemical” and “critical” have to be perceived in connection with their context, that is, a specific situation.