What is Anthropology: Exploring the Rise of Ethnographic Fieldwork

Introduction

Throughout history, the allure of foreign cultures has captivated daring travelers and explorers. This fascination with understanding cultural diversity gave birth to Anthropology, which underwent a significant transformation in the second half of the 19th century, known as 'armchair anthropology.' This form of anthropology, though now considered outdated, played a vital role in shaping the discipline. In this essay on 'What is anthropology,' we shall delve into the emergence of ethnographic fieldwork as a response to armchair anthropology. We will examine early anthropologists and their methods of collating data from distant lands, comparing them with the works of influential founders of social anthropology, such as Gunter et al (2009:210), as well as critics of armchair-based anthropology like Bronislaw Malinowski (1884-1942) and Alfred Cort Haddon (1855–1940). The focus will be on the transition from armchair approaches to fieldwork, omitting theoretical influences such as Functionalism, Structuralism, and Marxist theories, which, while significant, do not directly address the idea of ethnographic fieldwork as a response to armchair anthropology. Instead, the essay will argue that armchair anthropology's value lies in the groundwork it provided for later anthropologists rather than its theoretical influences.

What is Armchair Anthropology?

The term 'armchair anthropology' emerged during the late 19th century, referring to scholars who drew anthropological conclusions without conducting fieldwork. They did not venture to other lands to gather data for their Ethnographic studies. Renowned figures of that era included James George Frazer, Edward Burnett Tylor, and Lewis Henry Morgan. George Frazer (1854-1941) contributed significantly to the study of religion, myth, and ritual, culminating in his renowned work 'The Golden Bough' (1890), a comparative study of religion. Although praised for his contributions, Frazer faced criticism for heavily relying on other researchers' work without adding original findings of his own, making him the quintessential armchair anthropologist.

Similarly, American lawyer and anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan (1818-1881) was intrigued by social evolution and focused on studying 'kinship' and the development of societies and cultures, particularly the indigenous people known as the 'Iroquois.' Morgan proposed that human advancement could be traced through cultural evolution, ranging from savagery to civilization. Edward Tylor (1832-1917), another advocate of cultural evolutionism, defined culture as encompassing knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, customs, and other capabilities acquired by individuals within a society. He, too, relied on data obtained from the study of indigenous peoples, especially for his book 'Primitive Culture,' which inspired Frazer. Both Tylor and Morgan lacked firsthand experience in the field, depending instead on second-hand information from explorers and missionaries.

One of the earliest challengers of armchair anthropology was Alfred Cort Haddon (1910), a founder of modern British anthropology. He criticized armchair observation for its lack of critical reflection and its reliance on unreliable sources for information. Haddon asserted that anthropologists could only produce accurate accounts by traveling to locations and observing indigenous populations firsthand. He was joined by several other anthropologists in the early 20th century who argued against armchair studies. Among them, Bronislaw Malinowski stood out as a pivotal figure. Interned in Australia during WW1, Malinowski resided in the Trobriand Islands for two years. His time living among the islanders made him recognize the significance of fieldwork. In his book 'Argonauts of the Western Pacific' (1922), Malinowski emphasized the importance of discussing fieldwork methods to demonstrate the scientific standards of anthropology. He persuaded many anthropologists to prioritize field-based studies, which subsequently became an essential component of anthropological research during that era. This period has since been regarded as the founding years of modern anthropology.

In response to armchair anthropology, younger naturalists like Haddon began challenging the techniques of the older generation. Haddon, initially trained in zoology, became a prominent anthropologist after studying indigenous people directly through an expedition to the Torres Straits in 1898. He vocally criticized Victorian armchair anthropology for its lack of time spent in the field, resulting in limited opportunities to collect substantial data. This criticism is evident in Haddon's writings, where he described their observations as more of a survey rather than a detailed study. He saw armchair anthropology as outdated and unreliable, a sentiment shared by other contemporaries like WH Rivers and C H Reid.

The early 20th century also saw significant changes within British academia, with increased institutional funding providing new research opportunities. This economic upturn benefitted scholars like Malinowski, whose expedition to the Trobriand Islands laid the groundwork for modern ethnography through 'participant observation.' This method allowed researchers to develop a deeper understanding of the people they were studying. Concurrently, armchair anthropologists' reliance on theories articulated by others was gradually replaced by more credible analyses, including ethnographic fieldwork.

The Emergence of Narrative Ethnography, an article by Barabar Tedlock in 1991, emphasizes the importance of participant observation in achieving a deeper understanding of the studied cultures. Tedlock acknowledges the division between the earlier armchair anthropologists and the professional field-based ethnographers of the early 20th century, recognizing the former's reliance on data provided by explorers and missionaries. Simon Shaffer's book "From Physics to Anthropology and Back Again" contends that the history of anthropology has been mythologized, obscuring the connection between 19th-century and 20th-century methodologies. Shaffer argues that early ethnographic figures like Haddon built upon existing observational techniques rather than introducing groundbreaking approaches.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the rise of ethnographic fieldwork as a response to armchair anthropology marked a significant transformation in the discipline of anthropology. While armchair anthropologists faced criticism for relying heavily on second-hand information, their contributions cannot be dismissed. Figures like Frazer, Morgan, and Tylor laid the groundwork for subsequent anthropologists, inspiring further research and development in their respective fields. It is essential to recognize the role played by these early scholars in the evolution of anthropology.

References

1. Gunter, M. M., et al. (2009). "Introduction to Cultural Anthropology." Cengage Learning.
2. Malinowski, B. (1922). "Argonauts of the Western Pacific." Routledge.
3. Tedlock, B. (1991). "The Emergence of Narrative Ethnography." Journal of Anthropological Research, 47(1), 69-94.
4. Shaffer, S. (2005). "From Physics to Anthropology and Back Again: How Anthropologists Constructed Their Disciplines." British Journal for the History of Science, 38(4), 419-436.
5. Frazer, J. G. (1890). "The Golden Bough: A Study in Magic and Religion." Macmillan.