Perilous Ideas: Race, Culture, People [and Comments and Reply]

Author(s): Eric R. Wolf, Joel S. Kahn, William Roseberry and Immanuel Wallerstein
Source: Current Anthropology, Vol. 35, No. 1 (Feb., 1994), pp. 1-12
Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of Wenner-Gren Foundation for
Anthropological Research
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2744133
Accessed: 06-04-2015 14:17 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press and Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research are collaborating with
JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Current Anthropology.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Volume 35, Number i, FebruaryI994

CURRENT
ANTHROPOLOGY
? I994 byThe Wenner-Gren
OOII-3204/94/350I-OOOI$2.00
Research.All rightsreserved
FoundationforAnthropological

SIDNEY W. MINTZ LECTURE

FOR I992

Perilous Ideas
Race, Culture,People'
by Eric R. Wolf
have long
Ideas aboutrace,culture,and peoplehoodor ethnicity
servedto orientanthropology's
inquiriesand justifyits existence.
As bothoffspring
and criticofthehumancondition,anthropolto examinethe commonplaces
ogybearsa specialresponsibility
ofits thoughtand thefighting
wordsofits speechand to subject
themto resoluteanalysis.The presentcontribution
to thistask
of
suggeststhatwe mustremindourselvesoftheimportance
Boas's critiqueoftypologicalthinkingaboutracesas we confront
theintensifying
racismsofour time,takemuchgreateraccount
ofheterogeneity
in culturalsystems,and recand contradictions
ognizethatethnicitiescome in manyvarietiesand to call a social entityan "ethnic"groupis merelythebeginning
oftheinquiry.
ERIC WOLF iS Distinguished
Professor
EmeritusofHerbertLehman Collegeand theCityUniversity
ofNew YorkGraduateCenter(Bedford
ParkBlvd.West,Bronx,N.Y. I0468, U.S.A.). Bornin
I923, he was educatedat Queens College(B.A.,I946) and Columbia University
(Ph.D., I95 I). Afterteachingat a varietyofinstituat theUniversity
ofMichofanthropology
tions,he was professor
igan I96I to I97i beforejoining the facultyat CUNY. He has

done fieldworkin Puerto Rico (I948-49), Mexico (i95i-52,

I954, i956), and the Italian Alps (I960-6I and summers thereaf-

ter).His publicationsincludeSons oftheShakingEarth(ChiofChicagoPress,I959), Peasants(Englewood

cago:University
Cliffs:Prentice-Hall,
i966), Peasant Warsofthe TwentiethCentury(New York:Harperand Row, i969), and Europeand thePeoof
ple WithoutHistory(Berkeleyand Los Angeles:University
California
Press,I98 2).

Each endeavorto understandhumankindworks with a

set of characteristicideas that orientits inquiries and
justifyits existence,and for anthropologyideas about
race and culture and-more recently-about peoplehood or ethnicityhave played that guidingand legitimizing role. Franz Boas, who stands at the beginning
of American anthropology,taught us to be especially
attentiveto issues of race and culture.It is appropriate
to address these issues today not only because i992
marksthe soth anniversaryof Boas's death but also because one of the importantlineage segmentsin anthropologyreckonsintellectualdescent fromFranz Boas to
AlexanderLesser to SidneyMintz, whom this new lectureseries is designedto honor.I will attendespecially
to the conceptofrace,because it remainsa majorsource
ofdemonologyin this countryand in the worldand anhas a major obligationto speak reasonto unthropology
reason. This, too, is somethingthat Mintz, Lesser,and
Boas have insisted on and that we must heed. Thus, I
intend to focus on the concept of race, notions about
the biological variabilityof the species and about the
possibleimplicationsof this variability.I will thenconsiderthe conceptof culture,especiallythe idea thathumans depend heavily on behavior that is learned,not
inborn,and that this capacity forlearninghas fostered
the proliferationof quite varied bodies of thoughtand
action. Finally,I will take up brieflythe notion of peoples, envisaged these days as social entities-ethnic
groups or nationalities-that are conscious of themselves as ownersofdistinctiveculturaltraditionspassed
on along the lines of shareddescent.
These notionsare of course not onlyexclusive professional property;theyformpart of the stock of ideas of
much widerpublics who discuss themin moreextended
and less academic terms.This was trueeven when they
firstcame into usage. "Race" has been traced to generatio, "generation,"fromthe Latin generare,"to beget." "Culture" was firstused to talk about cultivating
a fieldand only later transferred
to cultura animi, "the
cultivationofmindsor souls." Greekethnosonce designated just a "bunch," without referenceto descent or
politicalcohesion; Homer spoke of a flockofanimals or
a swarmofbees, as well as a bunchofpeople (Benveniste
i969:90).

Usedin ourtime,moreover,
thesewordscarry

a heavyfreightofshame and fury.Contraryto the popular saw that "sticks and stones can break your bones,
butwordscan neverhurtyou," thesewords-as Morton
Friedsaid-can injuremind and body.The race concept
has presided over homicide and genocide. To accuse
someoneoflackingculture,beinga bez-kulturny(as the
Russians say),a red-neckor hayseed,a jibaro or indito,
someone who has not been to the rightschools, is to
declare that someone lacks culturalcapital and should
not be allowed into the Atheneum or the Escambron
Beach Club. And one of the ways of manifestingethnicityis now to don a camouflagesuit and graban AK47.
This relationbetween professionaldialect and more
discourseneeds to be understoodas part of the
general
i. This paperwas delivered,as the inauguralSidneyW. Mintz
ofThe JohnsHopkins wider interplaybetween anthropologyand otherkinds
ofAnthropology
Lecture,to theDepartment
on Novemberi6, I99a2.
of public understanding.The discipline did not spring
University
The presentpaperwas submittedin finalform4 v 93.

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 35, Number i, FebruaryI994

Athena-likefromthe head of Zeus; it comes out of the

cauldronsof conflictthat cooked up much of the toil
and troubleofpast centuries,and it responds-must respond-to these forceseven when it strivesforprofessional distance and dispassionate neutrality.It is precisely because it is both offspringand critic of our
conditionthat it bears a special responsibilityto examine the commonplaces of our thoughtand the fighting
wordsofourspeech and to subjectthemto resoluteanalysis. I hope to contributeto this task here.
Each of these threeconcepts-race, culture,and ethnicity-has a societal background,and thatbackground
has implications for how we conceptualize and use
them.I thinkof ideas as "takes" on the phenomenaof
this world and as instructionsabout how to combine
these takes to ascertaintheirconnectionsor, contrariwise, to hold themapart,to bewareofassertinglinkages
that are false. I also think that particulartakes are
promptedby background conditions and limited by
theseconditions.Thus Marx put forwardthe interesting
argumentthat Aristotlewas unable to conceptualize a
common denominatorin all human labor because, as a
memberof a slave society,he thoughtof the labor performedbyslaves and thatperformed
byfreemenas being
qualitativelydifferent.
"The riddleof the expressionof
value is solved when we know that all labor,insofaras
it is generalizedhuman labor,is oflike kindand ofequal
worth;but this riddle can only be unriddledwhen the
notion of human equality has acquired the fixityof a

popularconviction"(I946:3I).

One couldnot thinkof

different
kindsofworkdone as formsoflaborin general
as long as slaves and peasants,warriorsand priestswere
thought to perform qualitatively incommensurable
kindsofwork,but renderinglaborpoweruniversallyexchangeablebymeans ofmoneyas a commondenominatorpermittedthis new way of thought.Similarly,there
could probablybe no anthropology
ofreligionor studyof
comparativereligionas long as the religionsofbelievers,
heretics,and heathenseemed whollyincommensurable
and as long as the symbolic value of an object or an
act was thoughtto be an intrinsic,essential,inseparable
aspect of it-God's truth and not man-made hocuspocus, in the trenchantphrasing of Robbins Burling
(i964). Only when it becomes possible to divorcesignifierfromthe signified,symbol fromreferent,can one
talk about Christiancommunionand elite Aztec cannibalism as convergentformsof communicationwith the
divine.
interestedin what the conceptsofrace,
I am therefore
culture,and ethnicityallow us to think.I am also interested in how theyallow us to think.It is one thingto
be impressedby the spiritualityand holiness (baraka) of
a Berberholy man and quite anotherto ask how this
is constructed,portrayed,
spirituality
engineered-what
kinds of credentials,knowledge, and skills of performance are requiredto be a convincingagurram.Some
conceptsare essentialist;theyare takes on what are assumed to be the enduring,inherent,substantive,true
natureof a phenomenon.Other concepts are analytic,
suspicious of holisms, interested in how seemingly

whole phenomenaare put together.Periodicallyraising

thequestionofwhetherthe unitieswe defineare homogeneous or whether they are betterunderstoodwhen
and disassemblednot onlyallows
theyare disaggregated
us to evaluate concepts we have come to take for
granted;it also allows us to thinkbetter.

Race
One usefulway ofgettinga purchaseon therace concept
is to traceit to the greatarchaic civilizationsof the Old
and the New World.Most of them developedmodels of
thecosmologicalorderin which an exemplarycenter-a
metropolis,a mothercity-occupied the pivotal point
ofintersectionofall the directionsofthe cosmos,where
theyenacted collective rituals to maintain the orderof
the world and fromwhich they deployedthe power to
ensureit (Carrascoi982, Eliade I965, WheatleyI97I).
Beyondthe civilizationalcore areas lay the lands of the
barbarians,clad in skins, rude in manner,gluttonous,
unpredictable,and aggressivein disposition,unwilling
to submit to law, rule, and religious guidance. The
Greeks and Romans saw these people as not quite human because theydid not live'in cities,where the only
trueand beautifullife could be lived, and because they
appearedto lack articulatelanguage. They were barba(Homer Iliad 2.867), and in
raphonoi,bar-bar-speakers
Aristotle'sview this made themnaturalslaves and outcasts. Beyond the lands of the known barbarians,uncouth and threateningbut identifiablethroughcontact
in trade and war, lay the countryof "the monstrous
races," whom the Roman Plinius catalogued formedieval posterity,
both Christianand Muslim: men "whose
heads growbeneaththeirshoulders"(Shakespeare),people with one eye in the middle of theirforeheads,dogfaces, ear-furlers,
upside-down walkers, shadow-foots,
mouthless apple smellers, and many more (Friedman
I98I;

forIslamicparallelssee Al-Azmehi992).

These hierarchicallydeployed and ranked schemata

may be comparedwith those of more egalitariantribal
people. Forexample,theBrazilianYanomami,according
to Albert(i988), also begin theirsortingof people with
a local cluster,in theircase of fouror fivelocal groups
thatintermarry,
ally with each otherin war,and attend
one another'sfunerary
rites,in which all partakeofeach
other's vital substance by drinkingdown the ashes of
the honoreddead in plantain soup. Among these allies
one can expect sorcerybut of a gardenvarietymanageable throughordinaryshamanistic cures. Beyond this
core of allies live active enemies whom one does not
marry,with whom one does not exchangeor feast,and
fromwhom one is separatedfirstby raidingand counand second bywarpathsorcery(raidsin which
terraiding
pathogenicsubstancesare supposedlydepositedin each
other'scamp). Still fartheron lie the settlementsof potentialenemies who are said to performaggressivesor-

ceryat a distance(see Chagnonand Asch I973),

and

beyondthese live little-knownthough inimical Yanomami whom one fearsnot so much fortheirsorceryas

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WOLF

fortheirinadvertentpotentialkillingof one's alter ego

destinyanimals,which like to graze in these far-off
forest glades. In this scheme all people are seen as equally
benevolentand malevolentand similarin comportment
and bodilyform;it is theirdifferential
location on a spatial continuumthat identifiesthem as friendsor hostiles.The dominantcivilizationalschemata,in contrast,
assign differential
valuations to salient distinctionsin
life-styleand physicalappearance,as well as to the geographicalzones in which these life-stylesand bodily
formsare manifest,fromthe true and beautifulcenters
ofurbanityto the demonichillycragsand cavernsofthe
monsterworld. In addition to externalbarbariansand
misshapen people, there were also civilizational schemata forrankinginternal "others"-exemplary representativesof the civilized way of lifeagainsthoi polloi,
"the many." Proximityto rulership,participationin the
work of the gods, projection of values and idealized
styles of comportmentand performance-a proximity
at once geographicaland social thus instituteda ranked
scale ofvaluation fromthe paragonsto the stigmatized.
This should not be taken to mean that everybodyin
civilizationmarched in serriedranks accordingto the
dominant schema at all times. The Roman Tacitus
wrotehis Germania in part as an indictmentof profligateRome in contrastwith supposedlystill pristineand
virtuousbarbarians-floggingmoral decay and family
values is an old theme in history.Similarly,therewere
strainsin Chinese Taoism and Buddhismthat offereda
critiqueofrulershipand moralcorruptionby advocating
a retreatinto the "mountains and marshes" inhabited
by non-Chinese indigenous peoples or inverted the
schema of civilizationto look for"blessed lands" ofrefuge and immortalitybeyondthe confinesof the Middle
Kingdom (Bauer I976). Yet the centripetaltripartite
schemeheld fastforlongperiodsoftime,ifonlybecause
it correspondedto a tangible,experienceddistribution
of social power in geopoliticalspace.
Withinthe contextof Europe,Christendominherited
the schemata of Classical antiquity and transformed
themto fitits own logic and understandings(see Jones
I97I:38I).

The trichotomy
ofcivilized,barbarians,
and

monstroushumans was transformedinto one of the

faithful,the unredeemed,and the unredeemable.Slavs,
Germans,Vikings,and Saracens could be made to fit
moreor less neatlyinto the barbariancategory;a subcategoryof really vicious barbarians,very close to monsters,was constructedto account forthe pastoralistson
horsebackwho came chargingout oftheEast to threaten
the integrityof Christendom-Huns, Avars, Magyars,
Mongols, and Tartars.The Arabs constituteda special
problem,because theyappeared to be civilized and yet
had been seduced by Mohammed; the solution was to
declare Mohammed a false prophetand the Muslims

Christianheretics(JonesI97I:392).

The adventof the

Turks once again simplifiedthe classificatoryproblem;

into the subcategoryofvicious bartheywereretrofitted
barians,in which guise they kept appearingbeforethe
gatesofVienna and most recentlyas Gastarbeiterin the
Germanies.

Perilous Ideas 13

Beyondthe barbariansstill lay the lands of the monstrousraces (Friedmani98i). Opinion on thesestrangely
formedcreatureswas divided. St. Augustine thought
theywere still capable of salvation,no matterhow odd
in physicalformor language,as longas theywere "rational mortal"creatures,hence human and descendedfrom
"the one who was firstcreated," Adam. Others saw
themas fallencreatures,misshapedby sin or guilt,"displayingon theirbodies what the forebearshad earned
by their misdeeds" (Vienna Genesis, A.D. io6o-i I70,
quoted in Friedman i98i:93), probablydescendantsof
Cain or ofNoah's son Ham, who had sinnedagainstGod
and were thus supposedlyfitforenslavement.
AlthoughHam was occasionally representedas the
forefatherof the Saracens, of the natives on islands
of the Indian Ocean, of "ungentle churls" (Friedman
198i:I02-3), most sourcesassociated him with Ethiopians or Africans.This association gained intensityas a
rationalizationof the slave trade when Africareplaced
Europeand the Levant as the main source of supplyfor
coerced labor. In the early Middle Ages, it had been
northernand easternEurope that sent slaves to the Islamic Near East. In the later Middle Ages, the current
reversed,and Europe increasinglyimportedslaves from
the Russian-Turkishborderlandsaround the Black Sea.
In I45 3, however,the OttomanTurks cut offthissource
ofsupplywiththe conquestofConstantinople,and their
move into North Africa soon barred Europeans from
easy access to the eastern Mediterranean.Slavery existed,but it was not thencolor-specific.
By themid-i5th
century,however, the Portuguesehad expanded their
tradeforslaves down the West Africancoast as faras
Ghana, and fromthen on Africasouth of the Sahara became a main area of supplyboth forIberia and forthe
New World(Greenfield
I977, Phillipsi985, Verlinden
One of the main causes of the intensificationof
I970).
the trade was undoubtedlythe rapid decline of the
AmericanIndian populationin the wake of the Spanish
and Lusitanianconquests and the increasingdemandfor
labor on the sugar plantationsof the Caribbean about
which Sidney Mintz has writtenso eloquentlyand so
well.
As Spaniardsdebated whetherto enslave the Indians
of the Americas, they also resurrectedthe arguments
about the natureof the monstrousraces of long before.
JuanGines de Sepuilvedaargued that the Indians were
naturalslaves because theyweremorelikelybeasts than
men,wicked in theirlusts,and cannibalsto boot. Bartolome de las Casas, arguingin contra,repliedin St. Augustine's terms that they were rational and hence redeemable.
It is importantto rememberhow long the biblical
texts continuedto providethe main paradigmsforthe
of human events, how long it was held
interpretation
that the world was only 6,ooo and some yearsold, and
how long scholarsof reputeas well as laypersonsclung
to the beliefin human descentfromAdam and Eve and
in the tales of Noah and his sons and of the Flood. In
the i 5thcentury,maps still showedhow Noah redistributed and repopulatedthe worldby dividingit amonghis

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 35, Number i, FebruaryI994

ism, see Barnes i963:I78-238;

on France, Blanckaert
I988, Huss I986; on England, Hill I964, MacDougall
i982, MorganI988, Simmons I990; on Germany,Mosse
I964, Barnes I963. German "historicism"drew on romantic political economists,legal scholars,and sociological folklorists,as well as on Prussiacentrichistorians.) At the same time, colonial expansion and
imperialismcarriedEuropean flags to the fourcorners
ofthe globe and fueledideologiesthatportrayedthe Europeanvictorsas energetic,dynamic,active,masculine,
forward-looking,
and goal-orientedand the vanquished
as backward-looking,
beenthefirstpost-diluvians"
(BernalI987: 2I9).
low in energy,passive, feminine,
With Linne and Blumenbach we are, however,into sunk in sloth and livingforthe moment,retarded,and
regressiveand thus in need of being liftedup by the
race makingof the modernkind (see Slotkin I965:I70,
i8o, i90-9i).
of progress.
Linne categorizedthe races of Homo into standard-bearers
Americans,reddish,obstinate,and regulatedby custom;
Bio-moralthinkingand the increasingtendencyto unEuropeans,white,gentle,and governedby law; Asians, derstandhistoryas a struggleof races for dominance
sallow, severe, and ruled by opinion; and Africans, received reinforcementfromthe developmentof new
black, crafty,and governedby caprice. This classifica- orientationsin physiology.This new physiologyhoped
tion exhibits some enduringcharacteristicsof raciol- to overcomethe old conceptualsplitbetweenmind and
ogy-its obvious bias and the conflationof physical bodyby focusingon the way the brain and the nervous
traits,temperament,and political-moralbehavior.Blu- systemconnectedup all organsand muscles in the body
menbach,however,was no obvious racist.He held that (Jordanovai986). This new focus would, it was hoped,
humanswere descendedfromthe firstcouple createdby providea materialistlink between brain functionsand
God and differedfromanimals in their possession of temperament.It drew many physiologiststo pay attenreason. He also arguedspecificallyagainst the imputa- tion to the work ofFranzvon Gall, the initiatorofphretion that Africanswere basically different
in physique nology (McLaren i98i). In the early years of the igth
and deficientin rationality.He understood,moreover, centuryGall taughtthat mental activityhad a physical
that human varieties "so sensiblypass into the other, basis; that this physical basis was the brain; that the
partsofthebrainhad different
that you cannot mark out the limits between them." different
functions;andYet he did set up the Caucasians as the originalrace most relevantfor the developmentof raciology-that
fromwhich the otherssprangby variation.Althoughhe these functionallyspecificcomponentsof the brain in
himselfdid not interpretvariationas degeneration,oth- turninfluencedthe shape ofthe skull thatcontainedthe
ers did. Once the game of racial classificationbegan, brain,withthe resultthatmeasuringbumpson thehead
permutationsand combinations thereaftermultiplied would reveal clues to the head-owner'spersonalityand
thenumberofraces,eventuallyto thepointofabsurdity. character.Predictably,Gall's books were prohibitedby
Raciologywas markedby several convergentlines of the churchfortryingto do away with the hypothesisof
thought.First,scholars believed that by sortingpeople a soul separatefromthe body; yet preciselyforthis reaintophysicaltypesone could gaugetheirtemperamental son, phrenologyalso appealed greatlyto anticlericalbeand moral dispositions.Second, if some typescould be lieversin truescience. Generalizedto entirepopulations
shown to be more pure or betterendowed than others, of skull-bearersand elaborated throughever more sothen one could fit them as superiorand inferiorele- phisticatedtechniquesofmeasurement,thenew science
mentsinto the largercosmic scheme of "the greatchain of phrenologygeneratedan avalanche of craniometric
of being," understood as the God-given hierarchical studiesthatstroveto correlatecranialmorphologywith
chain of organismsthat reachedfromthe lowliest crea- assumed racial characteristics.The apotheosis of this
was reachedwitha scholarwho eventuallyapplied
turesto those most perfectin theirphysicaland psycho- effort
logicalrefinement(Lovejoyi964:59). Thus, the different more than 5,000 separatemeasurementsto the skull.
humanraces could be placed upon a ladderto perfection, Despite doubts and occasional criticisms,however,
withthe "gentlewhites,governedby law," clearlysupe- this century-longattempt to define the varieties of
riorto the otheranthropomorpha.Third,the rankingof humankind as enduring morphological types, each
racesfromthose least perfectto the most exaltedgained equippedwith a stable bio-moralessence,perduredwell
groundbecause it correspondedto the ways in which into our times. It reached, of course, a new paroxysm
and withNational Socialist "racial science." Yet even in the
many people began to comprehendthe reshuffling
reorganizationof societyin the transitionfromthe i8th United States, this "old physical anthropology"reto the igth century.Scholarlyliteratibegan to interpret mained in place until the mid-i95os, when Hooton and
nationalhistoriesas accounts of strugglesamong races, Dupertuisat HarvardUniversitystill typologized9,52i
overthe van- Irishmales into nine separatemorphologicaltypesand
withthe victorsshowingracial superiority
quished or the defeatedrising up in righteouswrath labeled each typea distinctiveand separaterace (Hunt
Only then did a more dynamicphysical
against their corruptand effeteoverlords.(On history i98i:344-45).
writingduringthe periodsofromanticismand national- anthropology
beginto replacethe old racial essentialism
threesons: Japhethgot Europe,Shem Asia, Ham Africa
(Friedmani98i:93).
In the i8th centurythe greatclassifierLinne, who was willing to grouphumans together
with apes and monkeys as anthropomorpha,still assertedhis belief "on divine testimony"in the descent
of all humans fromAdam and Eve, while JohannBlumenbach made the Caucasian, the "white," race "primaryamong all otherraces, because he believed in human descentfroma common stock throughNoah, who
landed on Mt. Araratin the Caucasus, and because he
thoughtthatthe Georgiansof the Caucasus mighthave

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WOLF

Perilous Ideas 15

with studiesofgeneticdistributions,environmentalad- cated Germans especially found it attractiveto accept

aptations,growthand development,and evolutionary such unifyingand holistic perspectiveson other culprocesses.In i962 FrankLivingstone
(i962:279) confi- tures,because theyhad been imprintedwith admiration
dentlyannouncedthat"thereare no races,thereare only of one such model of the Volksgeist,the paideia of anclines"-that is, gradualchanges in traitsand gene fre- cient Greece propoundedby the art historian Johann
quencies displayedby membersof a species along lines Winckelmann(see Bernal I987: esp. chaps. 4 and 6; Butof an environmentaltransition.Yet some have not yet ler i958). Rewrittenand reimaginedversions of Greek
heard or have opted to treat the issues with decorous historyand lifebecame a mainstayofupper-middle-class
silence. It should give our colleagues pause thatthe one aspirationsand the foundationof an educationcelebratrecent systematic book on the subject, Stephen Jay ingHellas as a whollyintegratedculturethathad known
Gould's The Mismeasure ofMan (i98i), was writtenby perfectionand was thus worthyof emulation.A major
an evolutionarybiologistand not an anthropologist.
traditionof intellectual thoughtand work-extending
In the United States,it was primarilyFranzBoas who fromWilhelmvon HumboldtthroughHegel, Nietzsche,
raised these questions, often against staunch profes- MatthewArnold,Frobenius,and Spenglerto RuthBenesional opposition.Having demonstratedan unexpected dict-has employedthe guidingnotion of an ideational
variabilityin head formin successive generationsofEu- holism at the root of culture.
To thiskindofapproachBoas was opposed.He underropeanimmigrants,
he thennot onlyattackedessentialist typologicalthinkingin human biologybut assailed stood that breakingdown culturesinto atomistictraits
in similartermsthe resultingconflationofhistory,biol- and studyingthem as aggregatesof such traits comogy,physiology,psychology,linguistics,and ethnology. pounded fromhere, there,and everywherewould not
His drivingconviction that correlatedphenomena do yieldusefulcomprehensionofhow theymighthang tonot need to be causally related led him to the conclu- gether.But he did offerthe beginningsof a strategyfor
sion that "any attemptto explain cultural formon a thinkingabout how this might work by referringto
purely biological basis is doomed to failure" (Boas what he called "psychic processes." His chiefexample
ofsuch processeswas the notionof "secondaryinterpreI940[1930]:I65).
tation," which implied that people build up complex
networksof connotationsupon initial denotationsand
thatit was incumbentupon anthropologiststo examine
Culture
these "psychic processes" in constructingthe internal
of a culture.
Justas Boas had disaggregated
racial typologiesand scru- interdigitations
After an interlude that focused on culture-andpulously severed considerationsof race fromconsiderations of culture,so he arguedagainstthe common pre- personalitystudies, American anthropologistsbegan
suppositionthat each culture constituteda distinctive again, in the I950s, to address some of the Boasian
and separatemonad sui generis.Since all culturescould themes and queries, this time with a concern for the
be shown to be interconnectedand continuouslyex- cognitive and symbolic dimensions of culture. They
changingmaterials,no culturewas due to "the genius wantedto look at culturenot as a typologicalgivenbut
"as a constitutiveprocess." They also hoped to direct
of a singlepeople" (Boas, quoted in Stockingi968:2I3).
Since cultureswere also foreverbreakingup and differ- theirstudiestowarda betterunderstandingof how peoand
entiating,it was not veryuseful to speak of culturein ple createor modifytheircollectiverepresentations
general;culturesneeded to be studiedin all theirplural- how traditionalmodes of representationmightprompt
ity and particularhistoricity,includingtheirintercon- or constrainthese effortsat rendition.In pursuingthese
nectedness.Moreover-and this was a major Boasian interests,theydrewheavilyon studies of literatureand
point-cultural integration could not be assumed; linguistics,focusing especially on the mechanics of
whereit was asserted,it had to be demonstrated."Have symbolicrepresentationthroughthe use of metaphors,
we not reason to expect," he asked (Boas I940[I9331:
metonyms,synechdoche,tropes, genres,and deictics.
447), "that here [in so-called primitivecultures]as in Ohnuki-Tierney(I98 i) has characterizedthese endeavmorecomplicatedcultures,sex,generation,age, individ- orsin termsofa professionaldivisionoflabor.Cognitive
uality,and social organizationwill give way to the most anthropologistshave dealt primarilywith the ways in
manifoldcontradictions?"Given boththe heterogeneity which sense images and sound images can be combined
and the historicallychanginginterconnectedness
of cul- to produce concepts or "memorycodes." Symbolicanfortheirpart,have concernedthemselves
tures,he did not see how attemptsto develop general thropologists,
"laws of the integrationof culture" could "lead to sig- mostlywith how memorycodes generatedin different
domains are combined and coordinated through the
nificantresults" (p. 267).
These argumentshad wider implications.It had be- elaborationofanalogycodes and thenhow these combicome quite common,especiallyin Germany,wherepeo- nationsare given condensedrepresentationin the form
ple opposed the universalistrationalismof the French of icons. Both processes-the constructionof memory
to assert the uniqueness of each people codes and the elaborationof analogycodes-need to be
Enlightenment,
and of its Volksgeistor "folk spirit." That spiritwas studiedtogetherto understandhow people arriveat culbelievedto be anchoredin passion and emotion,not in turalorderingsof theirworlds.
reason,and manifestin art,folklore,and language.EduSuch cognitiveand symbolic strategieshave indeed

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

6 1 CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 35, Number i, FebruaryI994

yieldedmuch workthatis richin descriptionand evocativelyintegrative.These studies go some way toward

engagingBoas's problematicabout how ideas in culture
are broughtinto association with each other-the how
of association and coherencebut not yet the why. The
whys still elude us. Anthropologistshave workedwith
a numberofdifferent
models to representorganizational
armaturesaroundwhich culturalformscould be said to
form-a frameworkofsocial structure,a basic personality structure,a culturalecological core, a Marxian productivemode dialecticallycombininginfrastructure
and
superstructure.
But all these approachesrelyon defining
thebasic armaturesor coresin termsthatrenderculture
secondary,as filigreeor ornamentation,ratherthan acknowledgingits strategicwork in layingdown the culturallyparticularand yet potent terms of personhood
and gender,descent and authority,rank and rulership,
class and race,natureand the supernatural.Treatingculture as secondaryalso recreates,time and again, the
seeming contradictionbetween earthbound material
processesand the free-floating
zigzags of the mind.
Anthropologists
have also takenseriouslyBoas's point
aboutoppositionsand contradictionsin culturebuthave
done littlethinkingabout how these heterogeneousand
contradictory
perspectivesand discoursescan intersect,
how divergentinterestsand orientationscan be made
to converge,how the organizationof diversity(Wallace
is accomplished. Notions of a common cultural
i96i)
structureunderlyingall this differentiation
sound a bit
too much like a little cultural homunculus built into
everyonethroughthe process of socialization or a Maxwell's demon capable of sortingdivergentmessages to
createnegativeentropyand order.I suspectthatcultural
orderingrequires leadership, control, influence, and
power,but thephenomenaofpowerwieldingin the cognitive and symbolic sphere are poorly theorized,and
thinkingon these topics usually proceeds quite separatelyfrominquiriesinto culturalmeaning.

Peoplehood/Ethnicity
talkedmuch ofrace in thelast
Althoughanthropologists
centuryand thenincreasinglyofculturein thisone, ethnicityemergedas a hot topic only at the beginningof
the sixties. This happened,I submit,forgood reasons.
"Ethnicity"addresses in ways that "culture" does not
the fact that culturallymarked entities formparts of
largersystems.It was only rarelythat the older literature about culture contact and acculturation raised
questions about power differentialsin discussions of
culturalborrowingsfromone culture to anotheror of
the modificationof existingculturesby novel introductions fromoutside. Furthermore,
the new emphasis on
ethnicityfastenedon the ways in which such groups
and entitiesarise and definethemselvesas againstothers also engagedin the process of developmentand selfdefinition.There is hardlya study of an ethnic group
now thatdoes not describehow the locals use "agency"
to "constructthemselves" in relationto power and interest.This is, I think,much to the good. It transcends

the bland, power-irrelevant

relativismof much of the
talkabout "culture."It moves us a considerabledistance
away fromessentialistperspectiveson culturetowarda
constructionist,
compositionalpoint of view. I suspect
that"culture"is composed and recomposedofdiversely
shaped elements,much as Boas saw it, ratherthan like
a dense tapestryimbricatedwithrepetitivestandardized
designs.At the same time,much of the discourseabout
agencyand construalstrikesme as undulyvoluntaristic,
of American chillike the "little-engine-that-could"
dren'sliterature-the littlelocomotivethat can accomplish feats of strengththroughthe application of will
power. To quote an older anthropologist,"men make
theirown history,but theydo not make it just as they
please." There is too much talk about agencyand resistance and too little attentionto how groupsmobilize,
shape, and reshape cultural repertoiresand are shaped
by them in turn; how groups shape and reshape their
self-imagesto elicit participationand commitmentand
are themselves shaped by these representations;how
groupsmobilize and deployresourcesbut do not do this
"just as theyplease," eitherin the course of mobilization or in the wake of the effectstheyso create.
Resourcemobilizationis easiest to perceivewhen our
eyes are fixed on political and economic resources,
which,notoriously,are embeddedin relationsofpower.
But it can also be observedin the way cultural repertoires are differentially
distributedwithin a culturebearingpopulation. Some symbolic codes and ways of
enacting them are monopolized by dominant elites
throughtheirprivilegedaccess to state and economic
apparatuses;they constitutewhat PierreBourdieuhas
called "culturalcapital." Othersymboliccodes and pantomimes,less highlyvalued or not valued at all, belong
to groupsoflower ranksand statuses,who also exercise
less social power. There are ongoingstrugglesover the
distributionand redistribution
ofsuch high-profile
symbolic goods, and success or failure in these struggles
has painful or exhilaratingeffectson peoples' selfdefinitions.
There are also historic changes in how ethnicityis
understoodout therein the nonacademicworldand how
ethnic claims are advanced that need to be confronted
and recognized.There has been a markedshiftin definitionsofethnicityfromracialistphrasingsto formulasof
culturaldistinctiveness,coupled with a stresson how
difficultor impossible it is forpeople of different
culturesto live togetherin one city,in one region,or in one
nation-state.There is a shiftfromthe idea of common
descentas definedby hereditarybiological essence or a
hereditarily
exclusive gene pool, as underthe "old" racism,towardthe idea ofcommondescentas a transgenerational vehicle forthe transmissionof an authentically
rooted culture. "We have roots here by virtue of descent-you othershave yourdifferent
way oflife,rooted
elsewhere,not here." This novel combinationof culturalism and ethologyVerenaStolcke (i992) calls "cultural
a new and morevirulentway ofstakfundamentalism,"
ing out ethnic claims to precedence and power. This
occurs preciselyat a time when an ethnic division of
laborgrowsmore intenseworldwideand when transna-

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WOLF

tionalmigrationis movingeverlargernumbersofpeople
across national frontiers.My point is once more a Boasian one-that claims to ethnicityare not the same everywhereand at all times. They have a history,and that
history-differentially
stressed in differentsituations
and at different
points of conjunction-feeds back in
variousways upon theways in which people understand
who theyare and wheretheymightbe at any givenhistoricalpoint in time.

Perilous Ideas | 7

ticularism,constructingan argumentthat Boasian theorynot only exists but continues to characterizemuch

of the anthropologydone in NorthAmerica.As a historianofNorthAmericananthropology,
I groundmy argument primarilyin published and unpublished documents about the work of Boas and his firstgeneration
ofstudents.The argumentis inseparablefrommy disciplinarypracticeas an Amerindianlinguist/symbolic
anthropologist.
In this wonderfuland deceptivelysimple paper,Wolf
articulateshis relationshipto the Boasian tradition.He
Conclusion
distinguishesbetween "lineage segments,"the personal
intellectual genealogies of individual anthropologists
It is FranzBoas's enduringlegacyto have made us think (Boas to Lesser to Mintz and, of course,to Wolfhimself,
moreclearlyabout the issues posed by race,culture,and or Boas to Voegelin to Hymes to the ethnographers
of
peoplehood/ethnicity.
This thinkingposes a challenge communicationamong whom I count myself),and the
to us now and to an anthropologyofthe future.We have "kin group" or "school," a social collectivity.Posttaken note of Boas's critique of typological thinking Boasians of quite diverse lineage descent have some
about races; we must remind ourselves of the impor- things,some ideas, in common. Wolf states them eletanceofhis contributionas we confrontthe intensifying gantly,in a formboth personaland generalizable.
racismsof our times.What anthropologiststendto relePerhapsmost significant,the Boasian traditionis idegateto thejunk pile oftheirprofessionalhistoryremains ationallybased. Wolf's title speaks of "perilous ideas,"
live tinderin theworldbeyondacademe. We should also and "peril" evokes a sense of dangerand difficulty
but
not turnourbacks on physicalanthropology
but support also of challenge and responsibility,turninganthropoits transformation
into a more contextuallyaware hu- logical ideation into anthropologicalideology. Wolf's
man biologythatcan engagethe developmentofhuman "ideas" have consequences in the world (and he is utbodiesin growthand maturation,reproductionand mor- terlyclear that most of the world lies outside the discitality, illness and health, and interaction with the pline of anthropology).
We cannot take forgrantedthat
changingconditionsof our worlds.In studies of culture our theorizingswill, or should,remainwithinthe ivory
we need to take much greateraccount of heterogeneity towers of academia. Anthropologistswho discard outand contradictionsin cultural systems and to explore moded racisms,static culturologies,and incommensuthe ways in which this differentiation
producesa poli- rable ethnicitieshave the furtherobligationto critique
tics of meaning and cultural construction and not theircontinueduse in the largerworld of politics and
merelyautomaticrepetitionof inheritedforms.In stud- human interaction.Words,ideas, have enormouscapacies ofethnicitywe can welcome the changesofperspec- ityforharm-especially, in Wolf'sview, when theyaptivethatplace cultureswithinlargerintra-and intercon- peal to emotionover reason.
nectedsystemsbut note also thatthismakes ofcultures
Contemporarystudents of popular culture, cultural
a problemand not a given: a cultureis a changingmani- studies, etc., often choose to dismiss the disciplinary
fold,not a fixedand unitaryentity.It also means that autonomyand historicallyconstitutedprofessionalexethnicitiescome in many varieties and that to call a pertiseofanthropologists.
Anthropology
is, in some very
social entityan "ethnic" groupis merelythe beginning real sense, endangered.To survive,we must understand
of the inquiryratherthan the implementationof it. As what the conceptsof our disciplinehave to offerin the
largermacrosystemscome in many shapes and sizes, so I99OS. Wolfranks the organizingconcepts of race, culdo the ethnic groups subsumed by them. This seems ture,and people/ethnicity
in termsof theiremergence
especiallyclearat the moment,when notionsofcultural in thehistoryofanthropology.
Workon what is labelled
have become major ideological weapons in "ethnicity,"beginningin the I960s, is recent,contemparticularity
politicalstrife.We have learnedquite a bit in anthropol- porary,and still incomplete. Its relationshipto older
ogy,but we are nowherenear the end of the task. A lot ideas remainsin flux.Wolf'schoice of "people" to gloss
remainsforall hands to do.
the anthropologicalversion of the concept is, de facto,
a claim forthe continuingexplanatoryrelevanceto generalpublic discourseofredefinedconceptsofrace as biological variabilityand culture as diversitiesof learned
behaviours.
Wolfis most lyricalwhen he offersa Boasian critique
of the misuses of the concept of race in the recenthisDARNELL
REGNA
toryof Europe.Boas was an articulateopponentofNazi
DepartmentofAnthropology,Universityof Western
Germany,insistingthat race was a statisticalcategory,
hierarchyofracial units was untenable,and biologywas
Ontario,London, Ont., Canada N6A 5C2. i6 viii 93
inevitablyand powerfullymodifiedby culturallearning.
For the past severalyearsI have been attemptingto ex- (In line withthe lattercontention,Wolfsuggestsa crossplicatethe theoreticalpremisesofBoasian historicalpar- culturalline of evidence, comparing"more egalitarian

Comments

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 35, Number i, FebruaryI994

tribal peoples" in search of alternativeconstructions liberalhumanism'sgeneralprojectof emancipationand

which would not dichotomize or rank races, cultures, to traditionalanthropologicalknowledgeare neverseriously engaged.
and peoples.)
His argumentabout culturedraws imperceptivelyon
This is not the place to rewriteWolf's justificatory
thatabout race. Formost ofthe historyofour discipline, historyof the discipline. Sufficeit here to point to a
thetwo have been definedcontrastively.
WolfreadsBoas particulardevice that allows him largelyto ignorethe
to have opposed the German Romantic tradition,in problemsinherentin the anthropologicalproject that
which the spiritof a people produceda passionate,emo- have been identifiedin recentacademic discourseand,
tional integrationof culture.Insofaras Volksgeisttheo- moreimportant,in the currentpracticesofculturalpoliries rationalized and supportedAryan supremacy,of tics both in the United States and in those partsof the
have traditionallygone uncourse, he is perfectlycorrect.Nonetheless, Boas re- worldwhereanthropologists
tained considerable respect for the emotional side of challengedto do theirresearch.The device to which I
human life alongside the rational in the "psychic referis the attemptto writemore or less separatehistoprocesses" which were to follow trait-basedhistorical riesofthe threekeyconcepts-race, culture,and people.
reconstructions
and to explain them. Wolfperhapsdis- This separationpermitsWolfto claim a scientifichigh
misses too quickly the culture-and-personality
school groundprovidedby a concept of cultureand fromthat
which pursuedthese connectionsas a mere "interlude" high ground to attack the practice of racism, ethnic
on theway to post-WorldWarII cognitiveand symbolic chauvinism,and the like. This procedurestrikesme as
fortwo main reasons. First,I would want
anthropology.
unsatisfying
Wolf'sprogrammeforour disciplinaryfuturerevolves to argue at greaterlengthbut can here only assert that
around the urgencyof transcendingthe dichotomyof the differencesamong the discourses of race, culture,
materialconditionsand mentalconcepts.Certainly,nei- and ethnicityand the political projectsthat theyimply
ther the naive materialismof I960s neo-Marxismnor areless thanWolfwould have us believe and thattracing
the polar ideas-in-isolation-from-anything-in-the-realseparategenealogiesdisguisesthe quite specificcontext
world idealism is viable three decades later. Wielding withinwhich these different
expressionsofWesternsoof power and constructionof social meaning are both ciety'sunderstandingof othernesshave arisen,namely,
necessaryand interrelated.Nevertheless,Wolf worries the continuingdebatesover the Enlightenmentand mothat contemporaryconstructionsof individual agency dernitythat have their origins in late-i8th-century
are "undulyvoluntaristic"and remindsreadersthatan- France,Britain,and, especially, Germany.Second, the
thropologistsknow how to see individualsas both cre- separationof what are, in my view, interrelatedeleative and constrained.Moreover,ethnonationalismand mentsof a single historyat the same time allows Wolf
ethnicgroupclaims to powerhave their"virulent"side, to leave himselfout of the analysis,as it were. Anthrojust as did the racism of an earliertheoreticalera. The pology,withits conceptualarsenal,now becomes a body
conclusion: eternalvigilance is the price of conceptual of thoughtthat is externalto the historyof modernity,
clarityin thebringingto bear ofanthropologicalanalysis providingits adherentswith a privilegedposition from
which to criticisemodernitywithouthavingto account
on the essentialismsof contemporary
global society.
foranthropology
itself.Ifmyfirstassertionis right,then
is directlyimplicatedin the ideologiesand
anthropology
JOEL S. KAHN
politics of differencethat have emergedin the course
of WesternEuropean and, increasingly,of a globalised
Departmentof Sociology,La Trobe University,
Bundoora, Victoria3083, Australia. 8 vII 93
modernity.It can no longertherefore
merelydismissthe
practiceof a politics of differencein the contemporary
Wolf'sbriefjourneyinto the historyof anthropological world (the hidden enemy to which I referredabove) in
conceptssuffers,in my view, froma certainlack of fo- quite so cavalier a fashionas Wolfdoes here.
cus. Apart from a worthy motive-to laud Sidney
Mintz-this shortpiece tracesa verylong genealogyfor
ROSEBERRY
the conceptofrace, a shorterone forthe conceptof cul- WILLIAM
New School forSocial
ture,and an extremelytruncatedone forthe notion of DepartmentofAnthropology,
The message is, Research,65 FifthAve., New York,N.Y. I0003, U.S.A.
"peoplehood" or nationalism/ethnicity.
apparently,that only the middle of the three,as con- I2 vIII 93
structedin the work of Franz Boas (supplemented,perhaps,by insightsfromthe third),has any genuinemerit Wolf's stimulatingessay invites us to think critically
and thatwith it anthropologymust continueto "speak and historicallyabout our concepts,and I wish to reflect
reasonto [the]unreason" of racism,both biological and here on threeof his observations:his emphasis on the
ethnicist.While one might wish to sympathisewith "leadership,control,influence,and power" involvedin
Wolf's motivations,his argumentis unlikely to con- "culturalordering,"his reminderofBoas's insistenceon
vince anybut traditionalliberalanthropology'sstaunch- the complexityand contradictionof culture,and his inest defenders,in partbecause althoughan enemylurks dication of the continuingproblem of explainingculbeneaththe surfaceit is never clearlyidentifiedand in tural"association and coherence."
We are now accustomed to thinkingof "order"in at
part because the challenges that enemy poses both to

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WOLF

least a dual sense, "to arrangeor classify"and "to command or make obey"-cognitive and political,as in the
now formulaicreferencesto a knowledge/power
nexus.
The perilousideas thatWolfdiscusses can be seen to be
orderingconcepts in preciselythis dual sense. We see
thismost clearlyin his discussionofrace (themostfully
developed of the ideas in this essay) and the tripartite
classifications of civilizational core, barbarians,and
"monstrous races" characteristicof archaic civilizations,but we see it as well in his analysisofthe development of each of these concepts in "cauldrons of conflict."
We still do not adequately understandthe complex
interplayamong anthropologicalideas, the political establishmentof "order," the wider cultural orderingof
complex social relations and processes, and the emergence of social and political strugglesof various sorts,
but we understandthatthe connectionsare intimate.A
colonial administratorattemptingto establish orderis
interestedin gatheringinformation,
countingheads, and
collectingrevenue,but along with even the worstof architectshe imagines an orderedsocial world of tribes,
villages, and households before(or as) he attemptsto
constructit. A Christianmission sets out to save souls,
but it imaginesthe fleshlycarriersof those souls living
in families,with houses and yards.
The role of anthropologicalideas in the imagination
of social and political orderand the role of particular
processesof social and political orderingin the formation of anthropologicalideas are betterrecognizedthan
theywere two decades ago. But we have yet to think
creativelyenoughabout the relationshipbetween order
and contradiction;without such thinking,answers to
thewhyquestionsposed by Wolfwill continueto elude
us. He correctlypoints to a centralproblemwith most
explanatoryschemes-the postulation of an organizational, economic, or ecological core in termsof which
cultureis seen to be secondary.A relatedproblemis that
ofholdingone dimensionofsocial and culturalrelations
constantor relativelystable while renderinganotherdimensiondynamicand contradictory-onthe one hand,
an overly systematic understandingof capitalism or
plow or digging-stick
agriculture,on the other,the postulationofa varietyof cultureriddlesthatcan be solved
in termsof the requirementsof the more stable core,
or,in anothervein, a broadlysketched"Cartesian revolution" or "modernism"in termsof which a varietyof
morespecificand variableculturalconstructsand forms
can be arrayed.
We need to understandthe processes of political and
cultural orderingwithout such convenient but misleading conceptual anchoring,maintaininga sense of
complexityand contradictionin each domain under
considerationand exploringthe mutually constituting
processes of political and cultural orderingin specific
social-historicalfields.Thus, as Wolfinsists,ideas about
peoplehood and ethnicity need to be understood in
termsoftheirconceptualhistoriesand in termsof their
Balkan,SouthAfrican,and NorthAmericangroundings.
Explanation,in thisview, can onlybe constructedin the

Perilous Ideas I 9

contextof specificsocial, cultural,and political histories. Our perilous ideas need to be placed within and
made centralto the kind of comparativehistoryand sociologythatWolfand othershave pioneered.
IMMANUEL

WALLERSTEIN

FernandBraudel Center,State Universityof New

Yorkat Binghamton,P.O. Box 6ooo, Binghamton,
N. Y. I3902-6000, U.S.A. I3 VIII 93
Wolfis as usual saying sensible thingsabout the concepts of race, culture, and people. He entitles his remarks"perilousideas," meaning,I take it, thatthe concepts have multiple usages and historiesand theiruse
as oftenadds to our confusionas reduces it. I agree. I
should like to develop the discussion on a peril which
is referred
to in his remarksbut not developedfully.It
has to do with the ways in which varyingconceptualizations play a role in legitimating(or delegitimating)the
historicalsystemsin which we live.
I believe that we all today are living in a singular
historicalsystem,a singularsociety if you will, that I
term the capitalist world-economy.Among its basic
structureshave been an axial division of labor reflected
in a core-periphery
polarizationand a political system
of sovereignstates bound togetherwithin an interstate
system.This singularhistoricalsystemhas a geoculture,
in my view, which means thatthereare normsand values which serve to legitimate the world-systemas a
whole and which receive some importantinstitutional
support.Of course,these values may be integratedinto
individualsuperegosto varyingdegreesor not at all. And
theremay be groups,even institutions,activelyopposingthesevalues. But a historicalsystemcannotfunction
unless at least some normsand values of this kind prevail (win out,on thewhole, againstopposition,disbelief,
or apathy).
One key geoculturalvalue has been that everystate
should be a nation. This is what we mean by "citizenship," and it formsin turnthe basis of the widely accepted mythof the primacyand legitimacyof popular
sovereignty(within each state). A second key geoculturalvalue has been the beliefthatover time it is possible to amelioratematerial conditionsand move in the
directionof greatermaterial equality. This beliefis asserted both internallyto each state and within the
as a whole. To the extentthatpeople give
world-system
credenceto these two geoculturalvalues, they are aswhich,I would
sertingthe ideologyofliberalreformism
argue,has come to permeatefirstthe core in the igth
centuryand thenthe peripheryas well in the 2oth (Wallerstein i 992b). I would furtherargue that liberal reformismas an ideology collapsed-in the sense that it
no longercommands widespreadadherenceand thereforeno longerserves to legitimatethe system-in the
I97os

andI980s, thisbeingtherealmeaningoftheI989

"revolutions"(Wallersteini 992a).
What does this have to do with races, cultures,peoLiberalreformismas an ideology,as a
ples? Everything.

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

IO I CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 35, Number I, FebruaryI994

geoculturalvalue, has the effectof pressingpeople to tribution.My primarypurpose was not, however, to
findsolutionsto theirproblems,look forsalvation,place write a historyof anthropologybut to honor Sidney
theirfaithin states,in theirstate. It politicizes people Mintz,and to do so in a particularway. I wantedto place
in a veryspecificdirection.And it tends to tame any Mintz among the executors of the Boasian legacy and
anarchistictendencies they may feel. In this sense, it to definethe importanceof that legacy for American
and perhapsforall anthropology,at this
has been an enormouslystabilizingdoctrineand a pillar anthropology,
of the existingsystem.To the extentthat this ideology momentin time.
First,Boas was punctilious and insistent about the
has eroded,people must find their solutions, look for
salvation,place theirfaith elsewhere than in states. I need to distinguishamong race, language,and culture.
among the discourses
would argue that this is happeningtoday to a degree Kahn writesthat "the differences
unknown in the igth and 2oth centuries.Races, cul- of race, culture,and ethnicityand the political projects
tures, peoples have thereforea new and much more that they imply are less than Wolf would have us beacute political resonance, one no longer contained by lieve." Yet I would reiteratethat fudgingthe distinctionswill lead us astrayifour purposeis to thinkclearly
the beliefin the centralityof the state.
But of course, as Wolf so clearly shows, races, cul- about the causes of human similaritiesand differences.
tures, and peoples are not essences. They have no Second,Boas preachedthe importanceofwhat now gets
approach" in U.S. anthropologyfixedcontours.They have no self-evident
content.Thus, called the "four-field
we are all members of multiple, indeed myriad, the importanceof looking at humans simultaneously
"groups"-crosscutting,overlapping,and ever-evolving. and synopticallyas biological creatures,culturecarriers,
However,to make groupidentitypoliticallyefficacious, and language speakers,in both the past and the presgroups tend to strengthenboundaries,reject overlaps, ent-if our purpose is to studywhat makes us human
demand exclusive loyalties.If this escalates, the politi- overthe whole rangeof our similaritiesand differences.
Third,Boas insisted that this was what anthropology
cal consequences are oftenveryunpleasant.
There is, at the same time, another,quite different was about. One can conceive ofotherpurposesand other
face to "groupism."Groupismis also the expressionof anthropologies,but-I submit-anthropology would
demo,raticliberation,of the demand of the underdogs lose sight of this central purpose at its peril. Building
(those geoculturallydefinedas lesser breeds)forequal the studyof anthropologyaround this purpose derives
rightsin thepolis. This expressesitself,forexample,in its justificationnot merelyfrommotivationsofintellecthe call for"multiculturalism"in the United States and tual curiosity(though this may sufficefor some) but
its equivalents elsewhere. The "universalist"response fromour historicalexperienceof worldwideexpansion
to multiculturalism-the call for "integration"of all thathas broughtthe diversehuman groupingsand cul"citizens" into a single "nation"-is of course a deeply tures into an encompassing networkof relationships.
conservativereaction, seeking to suppress the demo- This is the global panhuman entitywhich Immanuel
Wallersteindefinesin his comment as "a singularhiscraticdemand in the name of liberalism.
These are urgentissues to which thereis no easy po- torical system,a singular society . . . , the capitalist
litical answer. We are in the midst of a crisis of our world-economy."The rise of this systemconfrontsus
historicalsystem,and the violence will much increase with a task of understandingsimilarityand variability
beforewe emergefromit. What can intellectualscon- withinthe human species in ways that were never adtribute?One thing surely is a demystificationof 'the umbratedbefore,eitherin the universalizingreligions
"perilousideas" ofwhich Wolfspeaks,but it is scarcely or in the philosophicalendeavorsof the Enlightenment.
Kahn remindsus that this encompassingglobal sysenough. We must also engage in the utopistics of inventingthe alternativeorderinto which we wish to en- tem arose out of encounters of the West with "othterat the end ofthiscrisis.Classical anthropology,
along erness" and that these encounterswere all too often
with all the othersocial sciences, has in factdemurred fraughtwith mayhem and oppression. Anthropology,
at grapplingdirectlywith such enterprises.Still,as oth- too, a productof these encounters,was thus neverinnocent but implicatedin effortsat conquest and dominaers have said, hic Rhodus,hic salta!
tion. Roseberryseconds the point.It is all too true.Yet,
forwhateverit is worth,one needs to remindoneself
that if there were effortsto dominate or destroy"the
other,"therewere also efforts
to comprehendthatother.
Sometimesthis even allowed us betterto comprehend
ourselves. I always thought that one of the goals of
ERIC R. WOLF
teachinganthropologywas to make people aware that
but fora different
shufflingof the cultural,linguistic,
Irvington,N.Y., U.S.A. 30 VIII 93
and geneticcards theymighthave come to be Inuit or
I want to thank my respondentsfor their comments. O'otam. Instead, at the hands of some anthropologists
They make me aware thatI oughtto clarifythe context the existentialist"other" has now been transformed
in which my remarkswere written.I am pleased that into a bugaboo so impenetrableand incomprehensible
Darnell, who is one of the leading historiansof anthro- that analyticand comparativeunderstandingsof social
pology,findsvirtuein my account of Boas and his con- and cultural encountershave been virtuallyruled out

Reply

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

WOLF

Perilous Ideas

I iI

of court.We urgentlyneed to develop a more sensitive BERNAL, MARTIN. I987. Black Athena: The Afroasiaticrootsof
Classical civilization.Vol. I. New Brunswick:RutgersUniverand dialecticallyinformedsense of how involvements
sity
Press.
amongdifferent
societies and culturescan producea va- BLANCKAERT,
CLAUDE.
I988. "On theoriginsofFrenchethnolrietyof outcomes, including those of anthropological ogy:WilliamEdwardsand thedoctrineofrace,"in Bones,bodunderstandings.
ies, behavior: Essays on biological anthropology.(Historyof
5.) Editedby GeorgeW. Stocking,Jr.,pp. I8-55.
Furthermore,
just as the encountersamong different Anthropology
Madison:University
ofWisconsinPress.
"others"did not all producethe same results,it is surely
BOAS, FRANZ.
I940. Race, language,and culture.New York:
also the case thatnot all anthropologists
were alike and
FreePress.
notall theirthoughtprocessesclonedfromidenticalpar- BURLING, ROBBINS. I964. Cognitionand componentialanalysis: God's truthor hocus-pocus.AmericanAnthropologist
adigms.The Boasian legacyis oftentalked about as ifit
66:20-28.
were isomorphicwith Americananthropology,
but Boas
ELIZA
M. I958 (I935).
The tyranny
of GreeceoverGerhad moreenemies thanfriendsin his own time,and my BUTLER,
many.Boston:BeaconPress.
remarkswere addressedto the concernthat his central CARRASCO, DAVID. i982. Quetzalcoatland theironyof emmessageis not beingheardin the present.This also does
pire:Mythsand propheciesin theAztec tradition.Chicago:
ofChicagoPress.
University
not mean that Boas was rightin everythinghe wrote
AND TIMOTHY
CHAGNON,
ASCH.
NAPOLEON,
I973. Magical
and said.
death.(Film.)Watertown,
Mass.: Documentary
EducationalReYes, the claim that the centralpurposeof anthropol- sources.
ogy is to address the question of what it means to be ELIADE, MIRCEA. I965. The mythof theeternalreturn.New
York:PantheonBooks.
human,in all the variationsand convergencesthat this
termmay entail,also constitutesa claim to "a scientific FRIEDMAN, JOHN B. I98I. The monstrousracesin medieval
artand thought.Cambridge:HarvardUniversity
Press.
high ground." That claim asserts that there can be a GOULD,
STEPHEN
The mismeasureof man. New York:
J. I98I.
generalanthropology,with a unifyingpurpose,among
Norton.
otheranthropologies,and that therecan be generalan- GREENFIELD,
M. I977.
SIDNEY
"Madeira and thebeginnings
of
New Worldsugarcane cultivationand plantationslavery:A
thropologistswho make that purpose their own. Walstudyin institution
on
building,"in Comparativeperspectives
lersteinasks that we anthropologistsnot only cultivate
slaveryin New Worldplantationsocieties.EditedbyVeraRuour small gardenbut also "engage in the utopisticsof
bin and ArthurTuden,pp. 536-52. AnnalsoftheNew York
inventingthe alternativeorderinto which we wish to
Academy of Sciences 29e2.
enterat the end of this crisis." Large-scaleutopias are HILL, CHRISTOPHER.
and revolution:Studies
I964. Puritanism
in interpretation
oftheEnglishRevolution.New York:
now at a discount.Given the pessimism on the partof
Schocken.
manyabout whetheranthropologyhas a future,I would HUNT,
EDWARD
The old physicalanthropology.
E., JR. I98I.
happilysettleforthe small-scaleutopia ofthe discipline
AmericanJournalofPhysicalAnthropology
56:339-46.
thatBoas sketchedout forus.
RO GER. I986. "Micheletand theuses ofnaturalreferHUSS,
ence,"in Languagesofnature:Criticalessayson scienceand
Roseberrymakes a plea forus to be more innovative
literature.
EditedbyLudmillaJordanova,
pp. 289-32I.
New
in the ways we think.He wants us to be more creative
Brunswick:RutgersUniversity
Press.
about how we use our abstractionsto characterizeand JONES, W. R. I97I. The
imageofthe barbarianin medievalEuencompassthe complexityand heterogeneity
ofour subrope.ComparativeStudiesin Societyand HistoryI3:376-407.
Editor.I986. Languagesofnature:
ject matter.This is an importantmessage especiallyfor JORDANOVA, LUDMILLA.
Criticalessayson scienceand literature.
New Brunswick:
those members of our discipline who have come to
RutgersUniversity
Press.
equate what anthropologistsdo with the ways in which LIVINGSTONE,
FRANK B. i962. On the non-existence
ofhuman
anthropologistswrite. Anthropologistswrite,but that
races. CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY 3:279.
is not all they do. Roseberry'scomment suggeststhat LOVEJOY, ARTHUR 0. I964 (I936). The greatchainof being:A
could benefitfromtheoreticallyinformed studyofthehistoryofan idea. Cambridge:HarvardUniversity
anthropology
Press.
discussionsof its unusual mix of observationand grasp
MAC DOUGALL,
HUGH.
i982. Racial mythsin Englishhistory:
of contextwith operationsof inductionand deduction.
Trojans,Teutons,and Anglo-Saxons.Montreal:Harvest
That, too, would be carryingout the Boasian legacy.
House/Hanoverand London:University
PressofNew England.

ANGUS.
198I. A prehistory
ofthe social sciences:
in France.ComparativeStudiesin Societyand HisPhrenology
tory23( I): 3 -2-2.
MARX, KARL. I946 (i867). Capital. Vol. I. Translated by Eden
and CedarPaul. (Everyman's
Library848.) London:Dent/New
York:Dutton.
in Arabeyes.Past and Pres- MORGAN, EDMUND
AL-AZMEH,
AZIZ.
I99I. Barbarians
S. I988. Inventing
thepeople: The riseof
ent,no. I34, pp. 3-I8.
in Englandand America.New York:Norpopularsovereignty
ton.
ALBERT, BRUCE. I988. La fumeedu metal:Histoireet representationsdu contactchez les Yanomami(Br6sil).L'Homme
GEORGE
L. I964. The crisisof Germanideology.New
MOSSE,
York:Grossetand Dunlap.
28:87-II9.
2d revised edition. A historyof
I962.
BARNES,
HARRY
ELMER.
EMIKO.
OHNUKI-TIERNEY,
198I. Phasesin humanperception/
New York:Dover.
historicalwriting.
conception/symbolization
processes:Cognitiveanthropology
and symbolicclassification.
BAUER,
WOLFGANG.
I976. China and thesearchforhappiness.
AmericanEthnologist
8:451-67.
New York:SeaburyPress.
WILLIAM
PHILLIPS,
D., JR. I985.
SlaveryfromRomantimes
to theearlytransatlantic
EMILE.
BENVENISTE,
I969. Le vocabulairedes institutions
trade.Minneapolis:University
of
Vol. 2. Pouvoir,droit,religion.Paris:EdiMinnesotaPress.
indo-europeennes.
tionsde Minuit.
CLARE
A. I990. Reversing
SIMMONS,
theconquest:History
MC LAREN,

ReferencesCited

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I1

CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

Volume 35, Number i, FebruaryI994

New Brunswick:
Britishliterature.
and mythin Igth-century
Press.
RutgersUniversity
SLOTKIN,
JAMES S. Editor.I965. Readingsin earlyanthropol40.
ogy.VikingFundPublicationsin Anthropology
and evoluGEORGE
W., JR. I968. Race, culture,
STOCKING,
tion.New York: Free Press.
in an unVERENA.
i992. The "rightto difference"
STOLCKE,
Florence.
Institute,
equal world.MS, EuropeanUniversity
The beginnings
CHARLES.
I970.
VERLINDEN,
ofmoderncoloPress.
nization.Ithaca:CornellUniversity

WALLACE,

ANTHONY

F. C. I96I.

York:RandomHouse.

WALLERSTEIN,

IMMANUEL.

i992a.

Cultureand personality.
New
"The collapse of liberal-

ism,"in SocialistregisterI992: New worldorder.Editedby

R. Milibandand L. Panitch,pp. 96-IIO. London:Merlin.[iw]
. i992b. Troisideologiesou une seule?La problematique
de la modernite.
Geneses9:7-24. [iwl
WHEATLEY,
PAUL.
The PivotoftheFourQuarters.ChiI97I.
cago: University
ofChicagoPress.

Calendar
InternationalConferenceon EthnicTra- JulyI5-i8. The Social and Cultural Originsof LanMarch 2I-24.
ditional Culture and Folk Knowledge,Moscow, Rusguage,a conferencein association with the Language
sia. Write:OrganizingCommittee,International
OriginsSociety,Berkeley,Calif.,U.S.A. Write:Bruce
Conference,Instituteof Ethnologyand AnthropolRichman,conferencecoordinator,22oo Oakdale Rd.,
ogy,LeninskyProspect32A, Moscow II7334,
Cleveland Heights,Ohio 44I I8, U.S.A.
Russia.
September.Texts and Images of People, Politics,and
Power: Representingthe Bushman People of SouthApril 5-II. William RobertsonSmith Congress,AberernAfrica,Symposiumand Exhibitions,Johannesdeen, Scotland,U.K. Theme: Smith's life,times,and
work as a Semitist,theologian,encyclopaedist,and
burg,South Africa.Write:T. A. Dowson and J.D.
librarianand the various academic fieldsthat recogLewis-Williams,Rock Art ResearchUnit, Department of Archaeology,Universityof the Witwatersnise his influence.Write:William Johnston,Departrand, Johannesburg 2o5o, South Africa.
ment of Hebrew and Semitic Languages,University
of Aberdeen,King's College, Old AberdeenAB9
October 3-7. 2d InternationalCongressforthe Study
2UB, Scotland,U.K.
of ModifiedStates of Consciousness, Lerida,Spain.
April 27-30. SouthernAnthropologicalSociety,AnTheme: Ethnocognition,Shamanism,Plants and Culnual Meeting,Atlanta,Ga., U.S.A. Key symposium:
tural Context.Write:Institutde ProspectivaAntroAnthropologicalContributionsto ConflictResolupologica,Av. Gran Via de les Corts Catalanes, 457,
tion. Write:Alvin W. Wolfe,Departmentof Anthro4rt.,080I5 Barcelona,Spain.
November.The Pleistocene/HoloceneBoundaryand
pology,Universityof South Florida,Tampa, Fla.
Human Occupations in South America,Interna3362o, U.S.A., or HonggangYang, ConflictResolutional Symposium,Mendoza, Argentina.Write:Martion Program,CarterCenterof EmoryUniversity,
celo Zairate,InternationalSymposiumThe PleistoOne Copenhill,Atlanta,Ga. 30307, U.S.A.
July4-9. ThreatenedPeoples and Environmentsin the
cene/HoloceneBoundary,Centrode Geologia de
Americas: 48th InternationalCongressof AmeriCostas y del Cuaternario,UNMP, Casilla de Correo
722-CorreoCentral,7600 Mar del Plata, Argentina.
canists,Stockholm,Sweden. Write:Instituteof
Latin America Studies,S-io6 9I Stockholm,
Sweden.

This content downloaded from 200.16.16.13 on Mon, 06 Apr 2015 14:17:28 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions