Anthropology theory

Neo Evolutionary school

Classical evolutionist faced criticism from diffusionist. They did not recognise the idea of Pyschic Unity and Parallel invention as human beings were uninventive. They also disfavoured the unilineal sequence of cultural evolution.

British Neo-Evolutionist School

Gordon Childe

1.       Background – He was archaeologist

2.       Literary contribution – Social evolution

3.       Concept –

·         In his book ‘Social Evolution’ he described evolution in terms of three major events

ü  Invention of food production

ü  Urbanization

ü  Industrialization

             He analysed the transition under the impact of each of these events which he called ‘revolution’. He then classified the stages of cultural development based on his archaeological findings. However he also opined that diffusion of culture traits and migration must be discounted in the stages of evolution.

     

S. No	Archaeological Period	Cultural Development
1	Paleolithic	Savagery
2	Neolithic	Barbarism
3	Copper age	Higher barbarism
4	Early Bronze age	Civilization

The above sequence suggest he was influenced by Tylor. He suggested evolution of culture of mankind as whole so Julian Steward called him universal evolutionist. He did not focussed on particulars like classical evolutionist.

He also said that at each stage of cultural development mankind developed their technological skill to exploit natural resources. In early satge due to low technology development man was less aggressive towards environment. In civilizational stage he was aggressive which resulted in drastic change in life pattern.

Cave dwellers became house dwellers, hunter gatherers became food producers, writing made them capable of preserving things, development of cities made them urbanized

Finally Childe’s model is so general that it is neither arguable nor very useful.

Weakness of his scheme

1.       Relied too much on archaeological data to explain culture evolution.

2.       He categorically rejected the idea of universal precedence of matriarchy, sexual promiscuity, etc without giving any argument.

3.       He was not interested in civilizational sequence outside middle east and Europe.

4.       Unable to differentiate between old and present day hunters and gatherers.

Julian Steward

Earlier work of Steward was dominated by particularistic influences of Kroeber and Lowie. Later he centralized his attention on “Culture Ecology” and “Multilinear evolution”.

In his book , ‘Theory of Culture Change’ he suggested three fold classification of evolutionary approaches. Unilinear, Universal and Multilinear.

Unilinear – Classical evolutionist dealing with particular culture and placing them in stages of universal sequence.

Universal – Concerned with evolution of culture of mankind as a whole, rather than particular cultures. In this scheme distinctive culture traditions and local variations are excluded as irrelevants. It is applicable in case of its generalizations and not particulars.

Multilinear – This also deals with particular cultures like Unilinear. But it searches parallels of limited occurrence, instead of universals.

·         Doesn’t believe that all cultures developed through similar line of development. So wanted his generalization to be based on particular culture.

·         He was concern on historical reconstruction but never expected historical data to be classified in universal stages.

·         He wanted to study cross-cultural regularities but didn’t want to give any universal schemes.

Criticism

·         He was concerned with explaining specific cultural differences and similarities. He was criticised of felling into the historical particularistic trap paying too much attention to particular cases.

·         Harris did not accept evolutionism as methodology.

Leslie White

Though he was student of Boas but was admired by Morgan’s work.

·         His two famous books – The Science of Culture (1949) and The Evolution of Culture (1959) reflects his approach towards neo-evolutionism.

·         He was looking for universal principle to explain evolution. He mainly used the strategy of cultural materialism and considered ‘energy’ for it.

ü  Culture advances as amount of energy harnessed per capita per year increase or efficiency of the means to control energy increased or both.

ü  With the introduction of tools man has increased harnessing energy with time.

ü  Culture is survival mechanism. It is used to harness energy. There are three parts constituting the culture. Techno economic, Social and ideological.

·         Technological aspect dominate. When arranged vertically technological at bottom.

·         So cultural evolution is based on technology and energy. So he has talked about technological determinism.

1.       Law of cultural development -As the technology becomes more efficient, more energy is captured and utilized which leads to development in culture. He has stated this as law of cultural development.

                       E X T = C    E is energy, T is technology and C= Cultural development

Energy is more important than technology. Technology can become very efficient without leading to development. This may happen when there is no increase in capture of energy. For ex. Initially it was only muscle power. Later with tools man increased harnessing energy with time.

His stages of development includes savagery, barbarism, civilization and energy revolution. One more than Morgan.

2.       Social Organisation – It is combination of three process i.e Nutrition, Protection and Reproduction

N X P X R = S       N is nutrition, P is protection, R is reproduction and S is social organisation

3.       Property -  T X L = P     T is thing, L is labour and P is property.

For White Culture is an extrasomatic temporal continuum of things and events dependent on symbolism. Culture consist of tools, implements, utensils, clothing, ornaments, beliefs, rituals, games, art, language, etc.

He made clear distinction between evolution and history. History is concerned with particular event. Evolution is concerned with classes of things and events regardless of particular time and space. Evolution takes place in temporal continuum but particular time and place is not important. Temporal sequence is important.

Weakness

1.       Too much importance on techno economic factors. Pastoralism, agriculture, industry had their respective social system. Not supported by ethnographic evidence. For ex. Agriculture system has wide variety of social organisation.