Folklore Studies in Germany and Austria1 Doku-Ō Ni Okeru Minzokugaku-Teki Kenkyū2

Classic Japanese Anthropology

Special Issue Contemplating Masao Oka’s Call for Ethnic Research in War-time Japan

Folklore Studies in Germany and Austria1 Doku-Ō ni okeru Minzokugaku-teki Kenkyū2

Masao Oka

In: Yanagita, Kunio, ed., Inquiries into Japanese Folklore Studies (Nihon Minzokugaku Kenkyū), pp. 327-372. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1935 Translated by JRCA editorial committee

Introduction Chapter 1 The Beginnings of Folklore Studies I Justus Möser (1720-1794): Pioneer of historical and social folklore (1) Historicist scholarship and German history (2) National social policy (3) Pioneering folklore studies II Herder

1 This is an excerpt translation. The original table of contents is presented here with the translated sections underlined. The article was based on a lecture Oka delivered at the commemoration of Yanagita’s 60th anniversary held in July 1935, which was included in the collection of lecture texts edited by Yanagita. Footnotes were added by Akitoshi Shimizu, the commentator. 2 The German word Volkskunde is translated as minzoku-gaku in Japanese. Both words indicate folklore studies as an academic discipline. In English, the discipline is usually called “folklore,” but this word can also mean “folklore” in the sense of folk customs, or the like. In order to avoid confusion, minzoku-gaku is uniformly translated as “folklore studies,” whereas Volkskunde is given in its original spelling. In the inter-war years, Japanese folklorists began to categorize their primary objects of investigation, i.e., those cultural features that were distinctively “traditional” and had been primarily maintained by common people, as minzoku (民俗, literally meaning min[folk]-zoku[customs], largely equivalent to English “folk life, folkways, folk customs, folklore” and the like). The same sound minzoku means “ethnic peoples” as well. The two homonyms have distinct written forms, 民俗 (folk customs) and 民族 (ethnic peoples), respectively. In the same way, the disciplines that study them are indicated by a set of homonyms with distinct written forms, minzoku-gaku (民俗学, folklore studies) and minzoku-gaku (民族学, ethnology), respectively. In the article, Oka deliberately distinguished folk customs and ethnic peoples. However, as a device to avoid confusion, he used dozoku-gaku, an old word meaning ethnography, in place of ethnology. Japanese Review of Cultural Anthropology, vol. 18-2, 2017 16 Masao Oka

Chapter 2 The Romantic School of Folklore Studies Chapter 3 Folklore Studies as an Independent Science I Research trends after the Romantic school (1) Research after the Romantic school (2) Emergence of Dilettantism II Establishing scientific folklore studies: [W.] Heinrich Riehl’s social folklore studies as a contemporary science Chapter 4 Issues of Modern Folklore Studies I Collection and organization II The objects of folklore studies (1) Theories pursuing the Volk (2) Theories pursuing the Volksgut III Methodological issues in folklore studies (1) Historical method (2) Sociological method (3) Geographical method (4) Comparative ethnological methods Chapter 5 Folklore Studies Today I Naumann’s folklore studies II Sociological folklore studies III Racial and social folklore studies: Nazi folklore studies Concluding Remarks

Chapter 1 The Beginnings of Folklore Studies I Justus Möser (1720-1794): Pioneer of historical and social folklore Born in Osnabrück, Hanover, Möser was a social critic and a first-rate writer. Möser’s era was that of the so-called Enlightenment, and as is well-known, the Enlightenment proclaimed nature, liberty, equality, rationality, progress etc., and scoffed at “tradition” or “history” as nothing but ignorance and convention. Peasants, who lived mostly within tradition, were therefore despised as the most ignorant and in need of Enlightenment. The cultural and social unity of the middle ages had already collapsed, and capitalism of the early modern era had already caused transformations in rural living conditions, so that rural villages were facing a culturally, socially, and economically crucial period. In such times, Möser profoundly recognized the value and significance of history and tradition, and supported and defended peasant beliefs, rural festivals, old customs, and customary legal and economic practices. At the same time, contending that the peasantry constituted the backbone of the state organization, he presented and advocated principles for social policy regarding the social, economic, cultural, and moral significance of peasants in essay-style writings. Masao Oka Folklore Studies in Germany and Austria 17

Chapter 2 The Romantic School of Folklore Studies The historical significance of Möser’s work is found in two directions: historicist Chapter 3 Folklore Studies as an Independent Science scholarship and the new descriptive methodology of “German history” on the one hand, and I Research trends after the Romantic school his discussion of nationalist social policy on the other. (1) Research after the Romantic school (2) Emergence of Dilettantism (1) Historicist scholarship and German history II Establishing scientific folklore studies: [W.] Heinrich Riehl’s social Möser is the father of historicist scholarship in general and the founder of the historicist folklore studies as a contemporary science [approach to] history. In one of his major works, The History of Osnabrück3 Möser stated that Chapter 4 Issues of Modern Folklore Studies the peasantry was the authentic component of the [German] nation [Nation], while such I Collection and organization upper classes as lords and ministers were merely incidental beings for the national structure. II The objects of folklore studies When we take this into account, [so he wrote,] we realize that from here on, approaches to (1) Theories pursuing the Volk German history began to develop in a totally new direction. Historical description should not (2) Theories pursuing the Volksgut remain a simple chronology of historical incidents. He claimed that historians should III Methodological issues in folklore studies observe the origins, development, and varied conditions of the national character, (1) Historical method throughout every transformation of those factors. Looking back from now, his idea may seem (2) Sociological method obvious, but at the time, he presented a truly path-breaking historiography. Möser (3) Geographical method dismissed the rational, universalist outlook, or way of thinking of the Enlightenment, and (4) Comparative ethnological methods opened a new historicist methodology for recognition of phenomena under historical Chapter 5 Folklore Studies Today circumstances. Moreover, while the Enlightenment separated “the present” from “the past,” I Naumann’s folklore studies Möser connected “the past” to the “present.” He himself lived and thought within this II Sociological folklore studies connection, sought out the sacredness of legal customs from within the significant “past,” III Racial and social folklore studies: Nazi folklore studies and at the same time gave life to “the past” from the “present” daily life. Concluding Remarks In The History of Osnabrück, Möser probably attempted not so much to narrate historical facts as to represent historical logic (historische Logik), that is, how to think historically. His Chapter 1 The Beginnings of Folklore Studies historicism became the [literally] original impact towards the so-called “historical school” in I Justus Möser (1720-1794): Pioneer of historical and social folklore social sciences. Born in Osnabrück, Hanover, Möser was a social critic and a first-rate writer. Möser’s era was that of the so-called Enlightenment, and as is well-known, the Enlightenment (2) National social policy proclaimed nature, liberty, equality, rationality, progress etc., and scoffed at “tradition” or Möser, a statesman and a critical writer from Osnabrück, apparently directed his “history” as nothing but ignorance and convention. Peasants, who lived mostly within aspirations not to historical research itself, but instead to cultural and social policies, an tradition, were therefore despised as the most ignorant and in need of Enlightenment. The arena to which he was best suited. His historicism was in fact the foundation and cultural and social unity of the middle ages had already collapsed, and capitalism of the methodology for his policy formulation. He published his opinions on policy in numerous early modern era had already caused transformations in rural living conditions, so that essay-type articles he contributed to newspapers and journals. In those writings, he sought rural villages were facing a culturally, socially, and economically crucial period. In such themes in the daily life of peasants and bourgeois, and impressed the readers with the times, Möser profoundly recognized the value and significance of history and tradition, and beauty and value of the traditions, customs, manner, and lifestyle in peasants’ life, whereas supported and defended peasant beliefs, rural festivals, old customs, and customary legal on the other hand, he convincingly showed how “modern trends” were undesirable, and gave and economic practices. At the same time, contending that the peasantry constituted the instructions towards the future orientation of Volk’s4 life. I will explain his main ideas on backbone of the state organization, he presented and advocated principles for social policy regarding the social, economic, cultural, and moral significance of peasants in essay-style 3 Möser [also Mösers], Justus, Osnabrückische Geschichte: Mit Urkunden, 1768-1824. 4 Oka interpreted the German word Volk as minzoku (民族). Both Volk and minzoku as used in Germany and writings. Japan in the mid-1930s indicated “people” (pl. peoples) with strong connotations of ethnicity and familial blood solidarity. Therefore, an “ethnic people” is an appropriate equivalent for the two words (see note 4 in Oka’s first article of 1941). However, as far as Oka’s current article is concerned, a special device is necessary. 18 Masao Oka social policy in brief. In the face of German society which was then utterly divided and in chaos, Möser focused his ideas of social policy on how to restore German society to the unified order of the medieval past, how to bring vertical class conflicts back to a natural order, and how to organize all occupational classes (Stände5) in a pyramidal form based on the expansive foundation of a stable peasantry. In this regard, the issue of peasants that constituted the foundation of social formation was his greatest concern.

Chapter 3 Folklore Studies as an Independent Science II Establishing scientific folklore studies: [W.] Heinrich Riehl’s social folklore studies as a contemporary science The legitimate successor of Möser is Riehl, with his historical and social folklore studies. In the 1850s, Riehl resisted the Dilettante approaches to folklore of his times, and for the first time advocated Volkskunde in the sense of historical and social folklore studies as a contemporary science. Riehl is often referred to as the founder of German folklore studies, and as he himself declared, he viewed Möser as his mentor. In other words, he followed Möser’s orientation toward social folklore studies, and gave organization and objectives to the data gathered since the Romantic school. Riehl had a prolonged and unsettled career, studying theology and history in several universities and contributing to local journals in South German cities as a writer and later as an editor. Then in 1854, Maximilian II, King of Bavaria, invited him as professor of political science of state and finance, and subsequently cultural history, at the University of Munich. From 1859, he worked as the chief editor for a collection of geography and folklore, Bavaria (four volumes).6 He became a member of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences in 1862, and was appointed Director of the Bavarian National Museum in 1885. He also occupied a unique position as a writer. He liked to travel among villages across Germany, seeing with his own eyes and hearing with his own ears the land, people, society, customs, etc., and compiled those data from a unique sociological and historical perspective. The result was The Natural History of the Volk as Basis for a German Social Policy (Die Naturgeschichte des Volkes als

German folklore studies used to address folk life as lived by German people. In this context, the simple “Volk” indicated the German Volk. Moreover, Oka’s usage of minzoku (in the sense of ethnic peoples) in this article is different from other articles. Besides meaning an ethnic people, Volk has a connotation of folk or common people. When mentioning German sources that analytically distinguished the two senses, Oka indicated the latter sense, folk or common people, by applying other words, such as minshū or gunshū. However, in some cases, and particularly when German folklorists used the word Volk in a mixed sense of an ethnic people and common people, Oka adopted “ethnic people” (minzoku, 民族) for interpreting Volk. Considering Oka’s unique usage of minzoku, a special device is adopted in this article only; the word minzoku in the sense of an ethnic people will be translated uniformly as Volk. 5 Stände (pl.) broadly indicate positions or strata – estates, ranks, classes, and the like – in a social hierarchy regardless of particular historical contexts. Oka considered the word as belonging to the larger category “classes.” Oka interpreted the word as shokubun in Japanese, which indicates classes in a social hierarchy consisting of hereditary occupational classes as found in pre-modern Japan. 6 Riehl, Wilhelm Heinrich, et. al., Bavaria: Landes und Volkskunde des Königreichs Bayern [Bavaria: Land and Folklore of the Kingdom of Bavaria], 4 vols, 1860-1868.

Masao Oka Folklore Studies in Germany and Austria 19 social policy in brief. In the face of German society which was then utterly divided and in Grundlage einer deutschen Sozial-Politik, 4 vols., 1853-1869), which today is highly appraised for chaos, Möser focused his ideas of social policy on how to restore German society to the its classical value and significance. The first volume was on “Land and People” (Land und unified order of the medieval past, how to bring vertical class conflicts back to a natural Leute), the second volume on “Bourgeois Society” (Die bürgerliche Gesellschaft), the third order, and how to organize all occupational classes (Stände5) in a pyramidal form based on volume on “The Family” (Die Familie), and the fourth volume was “Travel Report” the expansive foundation of a stable peasantry. In this regard, the issue of peasants that (Wanderbuch). constituted the foundation of social formation was his greatest concern. Now I will introduce the major points of his theory in brief. According to Riehl, “these insignificant and ludicrous customs and practices, houses and Chapter 3 Folklore Studies as an Independent Science manors, garments and undergarments, kitchens and cellars, and the like – if they were II Establishing scientific folklore studies: [W.] Heinrich Riehl’s social folklore simply presented by themselves as research objects, they constitute nothing but a useless studies as a contemporary science jumble. These items are scientifically as well as poetically baptized only when they are The legitimate successor of Möser is Riehl, with his historical and social folklore studies. correlated to the mysterious organism that is the whole system of Volk.” He also wrote, In the 1850s, Riehl resisted the Dilettante approaches to folklore of his times, and for the “unless folklore studies (Volkskunde) seeks the central focus of its scattered research in the first time advocated Volkskunde in the sense of historical and social folklore studies as a idea of the nation (Nation), it can by no means be considered a science.” In other words, contemporary science. Riehl is often referred to as the founder of German folklore studies, folklore research can achieve integration only when it adopts the concept of nation or Volk as and as he himself declared, he viewed Möser as his mentor. In other words, he followed its central guiding concept, and only then can it acquire the basis to be an academic Möser’s orientation toward social folklore studies, and gave organization and objectives to discipline and establish itself as a new independent research field. the data gathered since the Romantic school. Riehl grasped the concept of Volk as a tangible as well as historical, social, and destined Riehl had a prolonged and unsettled career, studying theology and history in several community, conditioned by tribe, language, folkways, habitat, etc. universities and contributing to local journals in South German cities as a writer and later Furthermore, Riehl’s folkloric observations were totally unique. He directed his as an editor. Then in 1854, Maximilian II, King of Bavaria, invited him as professor of observations to social communities such as tribes, occupational classes, trade associations, political science of state and finance, and subsequently cultural history, at the University of families, etc., and always observed and considered particular customs, beliefs, and other Munich. From 1859, he worked as the chief editor for a collection of geography and folklore, folkways in relation to these social communities. Therefore, according to his method, folklore Bavaria (four volumes).6 He became a member of the Bavarian Academy of Sciences in 1862, research should firstly consider the character of each social community from its folk and was appointed Director of the Bavarian National Museum in 1885. He also occupied a phenomena, and then it should [integrally] describe and clarify both the Volk’s character as unique position as a writer. He liked to travel among villages across Germany, seeing with the total relationship of the [characters and folk phenomena observed among specific his own eyes and hearing with his own ears the land, people, society, customs, etc., and communities], and the structure of the Volk as the total organization of all social compiled those data from a unique sociological and historical perspective. The result was The communities. This method should be designated as entirely sociological. As he himself Natural History of the Volk as Basis for a German Social Policy (Die Naturgeschichte des Volkes als confidently stated, “folklore studies is sociology (Gesellschaftskunde [social studies]) as well.” In other words, it could be a sociological folklore studies or a folklore-studies-as-sociology7. As noted previously, Riehl grasped the Volk as a historical and social community. Contrary German folklore studies used to address folk life as lived by German people. In this context, the simple “Volk” indicated the German Volk. Moreover, Oka’s usage of minzoku (in the sense of ethnic peoples) in this article is to [Johann G.] Herder and other Romantic scholars who sought the character of Volk in a different from other articles. Besides meaning an ethnic people, Volk has a connotation of folk or common mystic power called “the spirit of the Volk [Volksgeist], Riehl considered the “natural history of people. When mentioning German sources that analytically distinguished the two senses, Oka indicated the latter sense, folk or common people, by applying other words, such as minshū or gunshū. However, in some cases, the Volk” itself as the law (Gesetz) and character of the Volk – an entirely historical viewpoint. and particularly when German folklorists used the word Volk in a mixed sense of an ethnic people and He endeavored to understand the present through the “natural history of the Volk.” He common people, Oka adopted “ethnic people” (minzoku, 民族) for interpreting Volk. Considering Oka’s unique usage of minzoku, a special device is adopted in this article only; the word minzoku in the sense of an ethnic himself had already claimed “the complete establishment of historical folklore studies people will be translated uniformly as Volk. (historische Volkskunde).” [Eugen] Mogk, the foremost representative scholar of historical 5 Stände (pl.) broadly indicate positions or strata – estates, ranks, classes, and the like – in a social hierarchy regardless of particular historical contexts. Oka considered the word as belonging to the larger category folklore studies, calls Riehl “the father of historical folklore studies.” “classes.” Oka interpreted the word as shokubun in Japanese, which indicates classes in a social hierarchy consisting of hereditary occupational classes as found in pre-modern Japan. 6 Riehl, Wilhelm Heinrich, et. al., Bavaria: Landes und Volkskunde des Königreichs Bayern [Bavaria: Land and 7 Oka’s interpretation here shows that folklore studies and sociology are combined as in sociological folklore, Folklore of the Kingdom of Bavaria], 4 vols, 1860-1868. but arranged in reverse order. It is not a folk (or folkloric) sociology, which may mean ideas of society held by folk or common people. 20 Masao Oka

He drew up his ideas of social policy on the basis of the natural history of the Volk, which he constructed through the above-mentioned methods and direct observation. The natural history of the Volk, in its turn, is condensed in the organized system of occupational classes (Ständeordnung) consisting of four classes, i.e., the aristocracy, the bourgeoisie, the peasantry, and the proletariat, all of which are based on the family. Aristocrats and peasants live and behave as the conservative and persistent elements, whereas the bourgeoisie and proletariat live and behave as the progressive and active elements within the Volk’s body. [To attain] a harmonious balance among these four classes is the objective of social policy that Riehl arrived at through his folklore-studies-sociology. Among these four occupational classes, Riehl took the greatest interest in the peasantry as the foundational class. Riehl regarded folklore studies as “the entrance to the political science of the state (Staatswissenschaft)” and also “the Urkende [charter] for social policy.” Möser’s vision of historical and social folklore that had remained fragmentary was superbly systematized almost one hundred years later by Riehl. To sum up, Riehl integrated the past, present, and future within his Volkskunde, in which his historicism connected the past to the present, whereas his sociologism connected the present to the future. “My method is summed up in two words: ‘observation and consideration’ (Beobachten und Bedenken). My purpose is also summed up in two words, ‘From life for life’ (Aus dem Leben fürs Leben).” From his words, we might understand that [his folklore research departs from] direct observations of the life of the people, which are considered historically, and [concludes with ideas of policy] for the sake of future life based on present life. Thus, historical and social folklore studies can be a contemporary science (Gegenwartswissenschaft) as well.

Chapter 4 Issues of Modern Folklore Studies Interestingly enough, the academic style of Riehl and his folklore studies was not inherited or developed by any other scholar for a long time. Nonetheless, scholars generally consider Riehl as the true founder of German scientific folklore studies. Not only his theory, but also the name Volkskunde, which Riehl first proposed, came to be sporadically used only as late as the 1880s.

II The objects of folklore studies As Riehl stated, unless a certain kind of philosophy guiding and integrating research is achieved, folklore studies would be limited to simple collection and organization of folk traditions, and would never be able to advance to an independent discipline. However, the discussion of guiding philosophy and research objectives itself provoked various competing arguments without reaching an agreement. Nevertheless, it was more or less agreed that the final purpose of folklore studies lies in the elucidation of the essence or character and the structure of the German Volk or culture. Herder found the essence in “the spirit of the Volk,” which invited various discussions along with an assortment of concepts such as Volksgeist [Volk’s spirit], Volksseele [Volk’s soul], Masao Oka Folklore Studies in Germany and Austria 21

He drew up his ideas of social policy on the basis of the natural history of the Volk, which Volksant Gemeingeist [Volksant collective spirit], and the like. These discussions, initially close he constructed through the above-mentioned methods and direct observation. The natural to philosophy of history, gradually inclined towards psychological interpretations, and history of the Volk, in its turn, is condensed in the organized system of occupational classes eventually gave birth to the psychology of ethnic peoples (Völkerpsychologie). The idea of (Ständeordnung) consisting of four classes, i.e., the aristocracy, the bourgeoisie, the peasantry, “Volk’s soul” (Volksseele) [for instance] has met heated opposition, and the question of whether and the proletariat, all of which are based on the family. Aristocrats and peasants live and the “Volk’s soul” really exists is still unanswered. There is no doubt that the Volk or tribe or behave as the conservative and persistent elements, whereas the bourgeoisie and proletariat culture in fact has a specific character. Should this character be considered as a historical live and behave as the progressive and active elements within the Volk’s body. [To attain] a and cultural construct or as an internal phenomenon of [the Volk’s] psychology or racial harmonious balance among these four classes is the objective of social policy that Riehl physiology? On this question, opinions were divided. arrived at through his folklore-studies-sociology. Among these four occupational classes, While pursuing the character of the Volk, folklore studies also diverged depending on Riehl took the greatest interest in the peasantry as the foundational class. Riehl regarded whether research should aim at the Volk (the ethnic people or the folk) or the Volksgut (the folklore studies as “the entrance to the political science of the state (Staatswissenschaft)” and Volk’s culture or popular culture).8 also “the Urkende [charter] for social policy.” Möser’s vision of historical and social folklore that had remained fragmentary was superbly systematized almost one hundred years later (1) Theories pursuing the Volk by Riehl. To sum up, Riehl integrated the past, present, and future within his Volkskunde, in As mentioned previously, the meaning of Volk varies according to its user. It may be which his historicism connected the past to the present, whereas his sociologism connected interpreted as peasants, common people, lower classes, and illiterates; or otherwise it may the present to the future. “My method is summed up in two words: ‘observation and be those uniquely German segments found across upper and lower classes within the Volk; or consideration’ (Beobachten und Bedenken). My purpose is also summed up in two words, ‘From it may be the entire [German] Volk. In any case, the Volk is a group of people who share life for life’ (Aus dem Leben fürs Leben).” From his words, we might understand that [his common mental and cultural characteristics such as language, beliefs, customs, etc. It differs folklore research departs from] direct observations of the life of the people, which are from the concept of race (Rasse), a group of people who share physical characteristics. The considered historically, and [concludes with ideas of policy] for the sake of future life based Volk is not always the same as the nation (Nation), a group of politically connected people. on present life. Thus, historical and social folklore studies can be a contemporary science Möser and Riehl conceptualized the Volk as a historical and social community. They also (Gegenwartswissenschaft) as well. considered the Volk as a system of [four] occupational classes (Stände), in which the peasantry formed the structural core of the whole system. The Romantic scholars assumed the Chapter 4 Issues of Modern Folklore Studies peasantry as the most loyal upholders of the Volk’s culture and often identified the peasantry Interestingly enough, the academic style of Riehl and his folklore studies was not with the Volk. That assumption of the Romantic scholars was inherited by the Dilettante inherited or developed by any other scholar for a long time. Nonetheless, scholars generally scholars and became the mainstream tradition in modern folklore. Many scholars considered consider Riehl as the true founder of German scientific folklore studies. Not only his theory, that the Volk, the main object of folklore studies, was actually the uncultured or illiterate but also the name Volkskunde, which Riehl first proposed, came to be sporadically used only [lower] class (ungebildete Unterschicht), that is to say the peasantry. Since the beginning of the as late as the 1880s. twentieth century, how to give a scientific definition to the [narrower] concept of Volk in the sense of partial class(es) within the entire Volk became the central issue in folklore studies. II The objects of folklore studies Firstly, [Eduard] Hoffmann-Krayer, in his book, Folklore Studies as a Science (Die Volkskunde als As Riehl stated, unless a certain kind of philosophy guiding and integrating research is Wissenschaft, 1902), defined the Volk as “vulgus in populo” (commoners among people) in the achieved, folklore studies would be limited to simple collection and organization of folk sense of the unenlightened lower class within a cultural Volk [Kulturvolk],9 whose mental and traditions, and would never be able to advance to an independent discipline. However, the discussion of guiding philosophy and research objectives itself provoked various competing 8 In a following sub-section (§4-II-(2) Theories pursuing Volksgut), Oka interpreted Volksgut as “folk (or popular) arguments without reaching an agreement. cultural items (or artifacts).” Gut (Güter, pl.) generally means “good(s), commodity(-ties).” In German folklore studies, Volksgut referred to finely distinguished cultural items as listed in the manuals for folklorists. Nevertheless, it was more or less agreed that the final purpose of folklore studies lies in 9 Kulturvolk was one of the key concepts of ethnology (Völkerkunde) in Germany and Austria. It was contrasted the elucidation of the essence or character and the structure of the German Volk or culture. to Naturvolk (natural Volk) in a parallel way with the contrast between “civilized” vs. “primitive” (or “non- literate”) peoples as in socio-cultural anthropology in the English-speaking countries. The pair of Naturvolk and Herder found the essence in “the spirit of the Volk,” which invited various discussions along Kulturvolk also defined the division of labor between Völkerkunde (or Ethnologie, ethnology) and Volkskunde with an assortment of concepts such as Volksgeist [Volk’s spirit], Volksseele [Volk’s soul], (folklore studies). The former generally approached Naturvölker (pl.), whereas the latter approached a specific Kulturvolk. While Naturvölker were generally open to ethnological research, a Kulturvolk was approached by the 22 Masao Oka psychological characteristics were generally stagnant in contrast to individual and civilized people of the upper classes. In the post-war era [after World War I], there has been increasing opposition to the view that designates the object of folklore studies as the “peasantry,” that is, the “lower, uneducated class.”

III Methodological issues in folklore studies (1) The Historical Method Mainstream theory in German folklore studies [today] aims at a contemporary science and focuses on the present time. It differs greatly from a mere statistical discipline in the way it connects the present with the past and tries to understand the present by referring to the past. For folklore studies, this [historical] method is, along with the sociological method, far more essential than the psychological method. Only by that method can folklore studies stand as an independent discipline. The folklore studies of Möser and Riehl, which were also philological and historical approaches, were all based on such historical methods. It was the group of scholars who joined the Historical Folklore Studies Annual (Jahrbuch für historische Volkskunde) who especially emphasized the historical method. The annual journal was first published by Wilhelm Fraenger in 1925. Most of the first-rate scholars of German folklore studies participate in the journal, which attests to the historical tendency within German folklore studies.

(2) The Sociological Method I have already expounded on the sociological methods of Möser and Riehl. In sum, they viewed the “Volk” from a social structural perspective, and they observed [specific] folkways in relation to the social bodies holding the folkways. Thus they directed their observations initially towards the identification of social communities or social bodies. They saw the Volk not as an aggregation of individuals, but rather as a traditional structure consisting of a variety of social bodies, so that the sociological method necessarily correlates with social policy towards future society. The above mentioned “social bodies” include various specific entities such as the Volk, tribes, occupational classes, trade associations, villages, youth associations, families, and the like. For Möser and Riehl, this sociological method inevitably related to the historical method, since social communities or bodies were grasped historically and socially, and were actually historical constructs. In this respect, the sociological method, along with the historical method, was the methodological foundation of folklore studies as an academic discipline. The methodological foundation for folklore studies to become a contemporary science (Gegenwartswissenschaft) may perhaps be sought here [in the social and historical methods of Möser and Riehl]. After Riehl, no one pointed out the importance of the sociological method,

Volkskunde organized within that Kulturvolk. From the ethnological point of view, German Volkskunde was a kind of auto-ethnography conducted by German people themselves. Masao Oka Folklore Studies in Germany and Austria 23 psychological characteristics were generally stagnant in contrast to individual and civilized and no one adopted it as the basic method of folklore studies. Only after the war [World War people of the upper classes. I] was there finally a call for the “revival of Riehl.” In the post-war era [after World War I], there has been increasing opposition to the view that designates the object of folklore studies as the “peasantry,” that is, the “lower, Chapter 5 Folklore Studies Today uneducated class.” During the Great War [World War I], German folklore studies had to halt all activities temporarily; postwar developments were spectacular. The most conspicuous among the III Methodological issues in folklore studies theoretical developments have been: first, Naumann’s folklore studies, generally known as (1) The Historical Method modern folklore studies; secondly, the revival of social folklore studies or those of Riehl (and Mainstream theory in German folklore studies [today] aims at a contemporary science and also Möser); and thirdly, Nazi folklore studies that are related with the second, and also focuses on the present time. It differs greatly from a mere statistical discipline in the way it based on racial outlook. connects the present with the past and tries to understand the present by referring to the past. For folklore studies, this [historical] method is, along with the sociological method, far I Naumann’s folklore studies more essential than the psychological method. Only by that method can folklore studies The scholar who represents the mainstream of post-war German folklore studies and who stand as an independent discipline. The folklore studies of Möser and Riehl, which were also is regarded as the most authoritative is Hans Naumann, the current Professor of Germanistik philological and historical approaches, were all based on such historical methods. [German Language and Literature Studies] at Bonn University. He introduced recently It was the group of scholars who joined the Historical Folklore Studies Annual (Jahrbuch für developed sociology, ethnology, and linguistics, and integrated various tendencies derived historische Volkskunde) who especially emphasized the historical method. The annual journal from the legacy of Romantic folklore studies. In a sense, he has established a kind of holistic was first published by Wilhelm Fraenger in 1925. Most of the first-rate scholars of German method for folklore studies. folklore studies participate in the journal, which attests to the historical tendency within For Naumann, too, the Volk as in Volkskunde (i.e., Kunde [studies] vom [of the] Volk) is the German folklore studies. primary focus of consideration. Ever since Herder and the Romantic school of folklore studies, the topic of “the spirit of the Volk” as an “actually existing” personal and esoteric (2) The Sociological Method power, in fact, had been tormenting folklorists for a century. Naumann deftly and boldly I have already expounded on the sociological methods of Möser and Riehl. In sum, they employed sociological and ethnological methods and demolished that monster in folklore viewed the “Volk” from a social structural perspective, and they observed [specific] folkways studies. He did not take up the issue of “who” (wer) is the creator of culture, but directly took in relation to the social bodies holding the folkways. Thus they directed their observations on the very issue of cultural creation. As for the creative activity of the Volk or common initially towards the identification of social communities or social bodies. They saw the Volk people, [he asked] how and where is culture created? His consideration is inevitably directed not as an aggregation of individuals, but rather as a traditional structure consisting of a towards the common people’s collective life and also towards social communities. Both the variety of social bodies, so that the sociological method necessarily correlates with social Volk and the common people [within the Volk] are aggregates of persons and social policy towards future society. The above mentioned “social bodies” include various specific communities, but by no means “individual persons.” The Volk and the common people are entities such as the Volk, tribes, occupational classes, trade associations, villages, youth aggregates of people who join predestined cooperative communities through their behavior, associations, families, and the like. works, and experience. Individuals can never break away from the Volk or the common For Möser and Riehl, this sociological method inevitably related to the historical method, people, both constituting those communities. Those aggregates of people or those social since social communities or bodies were grasped historically and socially, and were actually communities are the home society [or homeland] in the true sense of the term, the base historical constructs. In this respect, the sociological method, along with the historical ground upon which people can mature, and the only framework within which people can act. method, was the methodological foundation of folklore studies as an academic discipline. The The culture created in those aggregates is understood as a communal culture in which the methodological foundation for folklore studies to become a contemporary science creators remain unnamed. The age when the common people and the entire Volk were one (Gegenwartswissenschaft) may perhaps be sought here [in the social and historical methods of and the same dissolved with the rise of humanism. Within the Volk, the educated and Möser and Riehl]. After Riehl, no one pointed out the importance of the sociological method, uneducated classes were separated. According to Naumann, however, the upper and lower classes are never isolated in opposition to each other; rather, there are mutual interchanges Volkskunde organized within that Kulturvolk. From the ethnological point of view, German Volkskunde was a kind between them. Even the logical style of thinking among the people of the so-called educated of auto-ethnography conducted by German people themselves. 24 Masao Oka upper classes is at times interrupted by associational thinking. They may at times abandon their individuality and immerse themselves in communities among the common people, too. He states that the primary task of folklore studies is to consider the common people’s way of life and their communal culture. It is exactly this point which represents the sociological characteristic of Naumann’s folklore studies. Naumann posits that the characteristic of the communal culture is the primitive mentality of associations which is pre-logical (prälogisch). Here, the influence of French ethnology, especially that of [Lucien] Lévy-Bruhl is apparent. However, he distinguishes two kinds or pedigrees in that communal culture. One, he says, is a primitive and communal culture [or cultural items] (primitives Gemeinschaftsgut) created among the common people, and the other is a sunken culture [or cultural items] (gesunkenes Kulturgut), which originally belonged to the individual’s culture of the upper cultural classes, then sank down to the common people, and joined the latter’s communal culture.10 The primary task of the historical consideration in Naumann’s folklore studies is to distinctively identify the historical and genetic pedigree of these two cultures. There are innumerable cases where religious features of [Christian] churches sank down to folk beliefs, public laws to unofficial customary rules, artistic poetry to folk songs, and gorgeous fashion to popular costumes. All these [sunken] items joined to become the communal culture [of the lower classes]. In sum, we must admit that Naumann’s folklore studies deftly integrated the various characteristics of pre-war legacies, and brought forth an innovation in German folklore studies.

II Sociological folklore studies It is the contribution of Julius Schwietering that since 1927 he has inherited and developed the line of social folklore studies originating with Möser and Riehl (Schwietering, Julius, Wesen und Aufgaben der deutschen Volkskunde [Essence and Mission of German Folklore Studies], 1927). The fundamental concept that characterizes his theory or thought is “historicized homeland” and the “persistent pivotal class within the nation.” He differentiated German folklore studies from the internationally oriented comparative ethnology, and refused the deductive way of interpreting the German Volk’s character from primitive mentality, a general human pattern. He considers the object of folklore studies to be the Volk as the holder and carrier of folkways, and understands the Volk as “a natural- organic and fundamental construct,” upon which folk cultures are created. Therefore, a set of folk cultural features is identified with a particular Volk-group (Volksgruppe). 11 This

10 In this passage, Oka used the term “culture” in the sense of the whole culture of a specific “social community or body” and also in the sense of cultural items (Güter). The phrase “the individual’s culture” probably emphasized individual’s contributions to cultural creativity, a distinctive cultural feature of the “upper cultural classes.” 11 Today, the word Volksgruppe is used in the sense of “ethnic group” in general. However, in the context of German folklore studies on which Oka commented here, it indicated a partial group within the Volk as well. When commenting on Schwietering, Oka also used Volk in the same way as Schwietering in the sense of the holder of folk culture. Masao Oka Folklore Studies in Germany and Austria 25 upper classes is at times interrupted by associational thinking. They may at times abandon sociological framework makes it possible to interpret the character and meaning of the their individuality and immerse themselves in communities among the common people, too. folkways observed in a particular Volk-group in correlation with the character of that He states that the primary task of folklore studies is to consider the common people’s way of [holder-carrier] Volk-group. Thus, research into the Volk’s character (Volkstumsforschung) and life and their communal culture. It is exactly this point which represents the sociological research into folkways [or folk cultural items] (Volksgutsforschung) are organically correlated. characteristic of Naumann’s folklore studies. His sociological folklore studies give great attention to the peasantry. The peasantry is Naumann posits that the characteristic of the communal culture is the primitive mentality supposedly the pivotal conservative Volk-group within the entire German Volk; it has of associations which is pre-logical (prälogisch). Here, the influence of French ethnology, maintained creative power for many centuries till today; and its culture is the authentic especially that of [Lucien] Lévy-Bruhl is apparent. However, he distinguishes two kinds or document of the [German] Volk’s culture. Therefore, when reflecting on the entire German pedigrees in that communal culture. One, he says, is a primitive and communal culture [or Volk, the study of the German peasantry has fundamental social and ethical significance. He cultural items] (primitives Gemeinschaftsgut) created among the common people, and the other concludes that, through these studies, all Volk-groups within the German Volk must be is a sunken culture [or cultural items] (gesunkenes Kulturgut), which originally belonged to the woven into the organic and total Volk’s community. Therefore, he insists, sociological folklore individual’s culture of the upper cultural classes, then sank down to the common people, and studies must investigate not only the German peasantry but also all Volk-groups within the joined the latter’s communal culture.10 The primary task of the historical consideration in entire German Volk. They [all Volk-groups] are the upholders of the [German] Volk’s Naumann’s folklore studies is to distinctively identify the historical and genetic pedigree of community culture (volkhafte Gemeinschaftskultur) and the essential constitutive cells of the these two cultures. There are innumerable cases where religious features of [Christian] entire German Volk’s character (Schwietering, Julius, “Die sozialpolitischen Aufgaben der churches sank down to folk beliefs, public laws to unofficial customary rules, artistic poetry deutschen Volkskunde” [The socio-political missions of German folklore studies], 1933). Herein, to folk songs, and gorgeous fashion to popular costumes. All these [sunken] items joined to Riehl’s sociological folklore studies and his general plan of social policy are rediscovered, and become the communal culture [of the lower classes]. the methodological possibility is made open to jointly consider the Volk and the Volk’s culture. In sum, we must admit that Naumann’s folklore studies deftly integrated the various characteristics of pre-war legacies, and brought forth an innovation in German folklore III Racial and social folklore studies: Nazi folklore studies studies. Lastly, I will explain Nazi folklore studies, and particularly those after 1933. Ever since Hitler came in power in 1933, folklore studies, regardless of their scholarly contents, made a II Sociological folklore studies great leap in “social status” and became a hero of the times. The Nazi ideal is to establish a It is the contribution of Julius Schwietering that since 1927 he has inherited and Volk’s totalitarian state, so that all cultural policies of the State are founded on the positive developed the line of social folklore studies originating with Möser and Riehl (Schwietering, recognition of “the German Volk.” Due to this, racial cleansing of “the German Volk,” and the Julius, Wesen und Aufgaben der deutschen Volkskunde [Essence and Mission of German Folklore studying, ensuring, and proclaiming of the Volk’s unique culture came to be seen as Studies], 1927). The fundamental concept that characterizes his theory or thought is indispensable. In this situation, folklore studies that had for long devoted themselves to “historicized homeland” and the “persistent pivotal class within the nation.” He collecting and studying the German Volk’s culture necessarily raised their status from a differentiated German folklore studies from the internationally oriented comparative previous lesser discipline to the legitimate heir of the national academic tradition. ethnology, and refused the deductive way of interpreting the German Volk’s character from Despite the self-declarative title of “Nazi folklore studies,” it has not yet achieved an primitive mentality, a general human pattern. He considers the object of folklore studies to adequate theoretical scheme, and to date they have been zealously focused on criticizing be the Volk as the holder and carrier of folkways, and understands the Volk as “a natural- existing folklore studies. I think it will take at least a couple of years before Nazi folklore organic and fundamental construct,” upon which folk cultures are created. Therefore, a set of studies can present a decent theoretical format of its own. While Nazism bases its social and folk cultural features is identified with a particular Volk-group (Volksgruppe). 11 This cultural policies upon the “Volk,” in fact it treats “Volk” and “race” (Rasse) almost identically. Folklore studies is also organized from the perspective of race, which is at the same time the 10 In this passage, Oka used the term “culture” in the sense of the whole culture of a specific “social most distinctive and the weakest characteristic of Nazi folklore studies. Although community or body” and also in the sense of cultural items (Güter). The phrase “the individual’s culture” probably emphasized individual’s contributions to cultural creativity, a distinctive cultural feature of the practitioners call their work specifically “Nazi” folklore studies, there is actually nothing “upper cultural classes.” innovative in it. They situate themselves in the mainstream of social folklore studies from 11 Today, the word Volksgruppe is used in the sense of “ethnic group” in general. However, in the context of German folklore studies on which Oka commented here, it indicated a partial group within the Volk as well. Möser through Riehl to Schwietering, but as of now this school is still at a tentative stage. When commenting on Schwietering, Oka also used Volk in the same way as Schwietering in the sense of the Meanwhile, even some longtime authorities of folklore studies have been affected by current holder of folk culture. 26 Masao Oka socio-political trends [of Nazism] and have come to revise their theories ideologically. In any case, there is a variety of theories so that so-called Nazi folklore studies is in no way unified. Since Nauman has been the uncontested big figure in German folklore studies since the Great War, he has been the major target of ideological criticism by Nazis. Nazi folklore studies begin with reexamination of the concept of Volk, the object of study. Matthes Ziegler states, “for Nazi folklore studies, Volk is the totality of the [German] nation,” and, “folklore studies is ‘study of the reality’ (Kunde von der Wirklichkeit) that appears in the essential form of the [German] Volk’s community life; folklore studies investigates as the object of research the spiritual and physical creations stemming from the creative abilities inherent in all the Volk’s communities” (Ziegler, Matthes, Volkskunde auf rassischer Grundlage [Folklore Studies on a Racial Basis], 1934). Herbert Freudenthal says, “the essential character of the [German] Volk (Volkstümlichkeit, Volkhaftigkeit) manifests itself in the metaphysical unity and totality of the Volk’s soul (Volksseele) which exists internally in the foundation of the Volk’s body,” and “we must avoid explaining the [German] Volk conceptually. The [German] Volk must first be felt [with the senses], held in consciousness, and be appreciated.” He further says, “the Volk, as used in folklore studies (Volkskunde), is the totality of spirit and soul that fundamentally and essentially sustains the [German] national life, and that [the totality of spirit and soul] is determined by race, land, and history.” Furthermore, “German folklore studies does not pay attention to differences among social classes within the German Volk, but instead observes and analyzes the forms of the fundamental and essential spirituality and character manifested in the Volk’s total life,” and thus, “the purpose of German folklore studies is to elucidate certain eternal values and their preconditions for the race, land, and history, and to describe a temporal sectional view of a pure [German] Volk’s life” (Freudenthal, Herbert, “Volkskunde und Volkserziehung” [Folklore studies and the Volk’s education], 1934). Based on these theories [I would comment that] the [German] Volk as the object of Volkskunde is supposedly the Volk’s character, and that character is the manifestation of something called the Volk’s soul or vitality. [Thus] there appears once again the issue of the Volk’s character that is discussed in a metaphysical way. [Nazi] folklore studies investigates the manifest forms of, or the creations of, the Volk’s soul. [On the other hand,] Otto Lauffer states that German folklore studies is a “contemporary science” (Gegenwartswissenschaft) that studies the German Volk’s character as a community. He also states that German folklore studies investigates the pure mode of life of the Volk, that is, the Volk’s life as it is currently lived. Therefore, folklore studies must, first and foremost, describe carefully and accurately the Volk’s life as it is lived today (Lauffer, Otto, “Deutsche Volkskunde: Begriff und Aufgabe” [German folklore studies: Concept and task], 1934). The so-called “contemporary science” or what Ziegler calls “the study of reality,” and what Freudenthal refers to as the “description of the sectional view of life” – as all these [mottos] suggest, Nazi folklore studies characteristically defines itself as a contemporary [and empirical] science. Masao Oka Folklore Studies in Germany and Austria 27 socio-political trends [of Nazism] and have come to revise their theories ideologically. In any As the above explanations show, Nazi folklore studies have construed definitions and case, there is a variety of theories so that so-called Nazi folklore studies is in no way unified. purposes in intricate theoretical terms. However, when it comes to how to conduct research, Since Nauman has been the uncontested big figure in German folklore studies since the in other words methodology, they seem to be unable to come up with any innovative or Great War, he has been the major target of ideological criticism by Nazis. organized ideas as yet. So far, they have exerted their efforts mainly in criticizing the Nazi folklore studies begin with reexamination of the concept of Volk, the object of study. method of Naumann, especially his idea of distinguishing between “primitive and communal Matthes Ziegler states, “for Nazi folklore studies, Volk is the totality of the [German] nation,” cultural items” and “sunken cultural items.” and, “folklore studies is ‘study of the reality’ (Kunde von der Wirklichkeit) that appears in the In opposition to Naumann’s division of the Volk into the upper and lower classes, in which essential form of the [German] Volk’s community life; folklore studies investigates as the the former are supposedly the educated, and the latter the uneducated, Nazi folklore studies object of research the spiritual and physical creations stemming from the creative abilities has determined the upper classes to be the imported, alien cultural strata, and the lower inherent in all the Volk’s communities” (Ziegler, Matthes, Volkskunde auf rassischer Grundlage classes the Volk’s unique cultural strata. Furthermore, they claim that the two should not be [Folklore Studies on a Racial Basis], 1934). Herbert Freudenthal says, “the essential placed in an upper-lower relationship, but in a side-by-side relationship. Naumann posits character of the [German] Volk (Volkstümlichkeit, Volkhaftigkeit) manifests itself in the that the upper-lower division is not something innate and ruled by natural law, but that metaphysical unity and totality of the Volk’s soul (Volksseele) which exists internally in the there can be sinking and rising depending on education. Contesting this theory, too, Nazi foundation of the Volk’s body,” and “we must avoid explaining the [German] Volk folklore studies declares that the division is determined by race and genetic inheritance. conceptually. The [German] Volk must first be felt [with the senses], held in consciousness, They find it distasteful that Naumann referred to the so-called communal culture as and be appreciated.” He further says, “the Volk, as used in folklore studies (Volkskunde), is the primitive and characteristically pre-logical (prälogisch), comparing it with primitive totality of spirit and soul that fundamentally and essentially sustains the [German] national mentality. They are especially outraged to see that his ideas derived from Lévy-Bruhl, and life, and that [the totality of spirit and soul] is determined by race, land, and history.” flatly disparaged it as a theory of the “notorious liberalist Jew” Lévy-Bruhl. However, Furthermore, “German folklore studies does not pay attention to differences among social Naumann is not altogether without problem; his idea of defining the Volk, the object of classes within the German Volk, but instead observes and analyzes the forms of the folklore studies, in terms of pre-logical mentality is obviously inadequate. Even Lutz fundamental and essential spirituality and character manifested in the Volk’s total life,” and Mackensen, who highly appreciates Naumann’s theories, does not agree with the idea, and thus, “the purpose of German folklore studies is to elucidate certain eternal values and their tries to replace it with the ordering principle (an awkward translation, Ordnungsprinzip) preconditions for the race, land, and history, and to describe a temporal sectional view of a based on the characteristic tradition of communal cultural strata (Mackensen, Lutz, “Über pure [German] Volk’s life” (Freudenthal, Herbert, “Volkskunde und Volkserziehung” [Folklore die Ziele und den Inhalt volkskudlichen Schaffens” [On the aims and content of folkloric works], studies and the Volk’s education], 1934). 1926). In any case, Nazi folklore studies would never adopt liberal evolutionary theories Based on these theories [I would comment that] the [German] Volk as the object of which tend to equalize, standardize, and generalize at the expense of historical Volkskunde is supposedly the Volk’s character, and that character is the manifestation of particularities, that is, racial characteristics, according to Nazism. something called the Volk’s soul or vitality. [Thus] there appears once again the issue of the If Naumann’s idea were modified so that “upper culture” is seen simply as “un-Volk-like,” Volk’s character that is discussed in a metaphysical way. [Nazi] folklore studies investigates whereas “lower culture” is “uniquely Volk-like,” then even Nazi folklorists could not but the manifest forms of, or the creations of, the Volk’s soul. [On the other hand,] Otto Lauffer admit the efficacy of tracing the distinct historical pedigrees [of the upper and lower cultural states that German folklore studies is a “contemporary science” (Gegenwartswissenschaft) that strata]. studies the German Volk’s character as a community. He also states that German folklore According to Ziegler, “folklore studies must stand on the racial perspective and distinguish studies investigates the pure mode of life of the Volk, that is, the Volk’s life as it is currently between what is specific to the Volk and what is imported, and study all expressions of the lived. Therefore, folklore studies must, first and foremost, describe carefully and accurately Volk’s creativity that is alive in every form of the Volk’s life. Concrete and factual the Volk’s life as it is lived today (Lauffer, Otto, “Deutsche Volkskunde: Begriff und Aufgabe” presentations of the historical development of what is specific to the Volk and what is [German folklore studies: Concept and task], 1934). The so-called “contemporary science” or imported will have not only methodological but also political and educational significance.” what Ziegler calls “the study of reality,” and what Freudenthal refers to as the “description In fact, despite its criticisms, Nazi folklore studies has adopted Naumann’s historical of the sectional view of life” – as all these [mottos] suggest, Nazi folklore studies methods. characteristically defines itself as a contemporary [and empirical] science. Nazis frequently call for the revival of Riehl. The main reason is that Riehl held the idea of “Volk” or “state” as the focus of his folklore research, and made folklore research the 28 Masao Oka foundation of the political science of state or state policies. However, Nazi folklore studies seems not to have made sufficient attempts to develop Riehl’s sociological methods in the way Schwietering actually did. In sum, Nazi folklore studies still needs further systematic improvement in methodology.12

12 At the end of this section on Nazi folklore studies, Oka repeated the same comment, writing, “To sum up, Nazi folklore studies is still midway on the path to perfection, and has not yet attained an adequate theoretical order”.