Celtic Cultures
Anthropology 211
Notes Packet- Spring 2011
Professor K. Markley
Celtic Cultures- Spring 2011
Key Anthropological Terms and Concepts
Anthropology isthe holistic study of humankind. Anthropology is unique among the disciplines that study humans in that it encompasses everything involved with humans and human institutions in its study of humankind. Areas that anthropologists study include; biology, evolution, culture, history, cross-cultural comparisons, linguistics, politics, economics, religion, history, pre-history, philosophy, etc. Anthropologists in the United States utilize the four-field approach to gain insights and understandings of humankind. The four-fields of anthropology are;
Biological or Physical Anthropology: the study of humans as biological organisms.
Includes the study of the evolution of humans, human variation, and primatology.
Cultural Anthropology: study of human cultures around human institutions around the world. The anthropology of religion is a subfield of cultural anthropology.
Linguistic Anthropology or Language and Culture: includes the study of language and culture, the evolution of language, and the history of language.
Archeology: involves the study of human remains and human artifacts to understand human pre-history.
Culture is one of the key concepts in anthropology. Anthropologists have spent a fair amount of time working to come up with a definition of culture that satisfies all of the aspects of human cultures around the world. There is no universally agreed upon definition of culture but most anthropologists would agree that a definition of culture would include the following:
Culture is learned. You do not inherit your culture. You learn it in the culture that you are
raised in.
Culture is shared. Culture requires a community of people
Culture is symbolic. When you are a part of a culture you learn the various meanings of the symbols in that culture. Depending on what culture you are raised in certain symbols will be significant to you or insignificant to you.
Culture is adaptive. In that your culture tells you the acceptable way to live and survive.
The culture that we are raised in informs us what animals and plants are food sources,
what type of shelters to live in, and what clothing is appropriate to wear. The political and
economic systems of a society are also a part of the culture that people live in.
Culture is integrated. All of the different systems and institutions in the culture operate
together, such as the economic and political system along with the predominant belief
systems. No aspect of culture is isolated and each part affects the other parts. A change
in one area of a culture often affects other areas of the culture (a change in the economic
system can affect religious values and expressions.)
Ethnocentric- It is understandthat individuals in all human groupsview other groups thru their own “cultural lens.” They judge their own culture as normal, rational and natural and other cultures are perceived (consciously and unconsciously) as “less than” their own culture (less normal, less rational, less reasonable, etc.)
Cultural Relativity- Is the counterpoint to ethnocentrism. It is a guidingprinciple and understanding in anthropology. When you are learning about another culture you need to be aware and conscious of your ethnocentrism. When studying and interacting with other cultures you need to work to view these other cultures from their cultural lens. You need to suspend your conscious judgment. In gaining insight into Homo sapiens, anthropologists see all cultures as being equally valid expressions of the human essence.
Holistic- wholelistic”, looking at the whole picture. Anthropology is a holistic discipline in that the comparative approach is used to gain insight into Homo sapiens . Another aspect of the holistic approach is using the four fields of anthropology (cultural, physical, archeology and linguistics). Looking at how the micro level (individual, family, small group) interrelates with the macro level (institutional level-economic, political, societal level). A holistic perspective uses data from cultures around the world as well as from the past.
Comparative approach- compare and contrast humans in cultures around the world and in various cultures over time. The comparative approach allows us to gain insight into human universals (things all human groups do or have, marriage for example) and how these cultural universals vary among societies (cultural specifics).
Emic / Etic: Anthropologists gather data through participant-observation, which involves living
and working among the people that are being studied. Anthropologists use open ended questions and observation to gain qualitative data about the cultures they are studying. This is in contrast to psychologists and sociologists which tend to use questionnaires, and surveys as well as controlled experiments in their study of humans and societies. One goal of anthropological fieldwork is to gain the emic (insider) perspective of the people being studied. The emic perspective is to gain “uncritical representations of reality shared by members of a given culture.” Once data has been gathered an ethnography is written which involves putting forth the emic perspective and then conducting an etic (outsider) analysis. Etic perspectives include “comprehensive, explanatory representations of reality recognized by the scientific community.”
Ideal/Real: A key goal of ethnographic fieldwork is to get beyond what “people say they do” (ideal) to “what people actually do” (real). Participant-observation is a great way to go from the ideal to the real.
Theories in Cultural Anthropology:
Social Evolutionary Theory: This theory was influential in the mid 1800’s. As anthropologists, and others, traveled around the world and saw different types of cultures and societies they compared these cultures to their own. They believed that their society was the best and the most advanced. They saw Western, European culture as having achieved “civilization” while the other groups they observed, such as the Australian Aborigines, as being stuck in “savagery. Social Evolutionary Theory was used to explain the differences they saw in cultures around the world.
Basically it says this:
1. All societies will progress through a series of stages from savagery, to barbarism, to civilization. Societies progress at different speeds (some cultures are still stuck in savagery, others have attained civilization).
2. The stage a society is at is determined by; their level of technology, subsistence means, belief system, mating rules, descent system, economic system, political system, etc
- savagery- gathering of food, mating promiscuous (brother/sister mating prohibited), basic unit of society small, nomadic “horde”, possessions ownded communally, bow & arrow used, descent reckoned through females
- barbarism- pottery invented, farming begun, incest prohibitions extended to include all females in clan, development of metallurgy, descent reckoned through male line, practiced polygny, concept of private property appeared
- civilization- invention of writing, civil/state governments, monogamous family formation
Social Evolutionary Theory has been abandoned in anthropology as being ethnocentric, racist and inaccurate.
Historical Particularism: Franz Boas originated this perspective. He felt that the social evolutionary perspective was ethnocentric and biased. Historical particularism states that to understand a culture you must gain insight into the history and material conditions under which a culture developed (anthropologists must do fieldwork to gain this information). Boas stated that anthropologists need to be culturally relative in their investigations. He also stated that you cannot generalize about a variety of cultures by studying one culture and assuming similarities.
Functionalism: There are various types of functionalist theory but in general functionalism works to explain the “function” of the customs and institutions that are prevalent in human societies. The idea is that if an institution like marriage exists in all human groups then it must perform some function for humans (or else why would it exist in all cultures). Functionalists focus at either the individual (psychological level) or the social (societal) level. For instance the institution of marriage “functions” to serve the individual (to help fulfill individuals biological and psychological needs) and it also “functions” to serve the society (to help keep the society running smoothly, to minimize conflicts, provide for rights and responsibilities for children).
Postmodernism: Postmodernism is a perspective that exists across multiple disciplines and can be defined in a variety of ways. What is relevant in anthropology is an understanding of Postmodernism as a reaction to earlier positivist perspectives. Positivists believed that humans can be objective observers (for instance if they are trained in science) and that there is an objective reality to be observed and documented through empirical observation. Postmodernists would state that humans cannot be truly objective observers and there is no one objective reality to be found.
In anthropology postmodernism grew out of insights from feminist and ethnic minority anthropologists who were highly critical of many of the ethnographies of their day and the past. They saw these ethnographies as one-dimensional perspectives of the cultures being presented. Most of the early anthropological fieldwork (like research in other fields) was done by white, upper socioeconomic class, western, males. Postmodernists noted that the researchers were influenced by their positionality and their status in their own culture (i.e. their key informants were males of a similar status and they didn’t talk to females or those who were of lower status). Postmodernists often work to “deconstruct” existing literature, ideas and ethnographies. Postmodernists see societies as being engaged in a constant battle over opposing subjective interpretations. Observations and interpretations of societies vary based on a persons gender, class, and ethnicity. Issues such as who has power and voice in a society) are critical to postmodern scholars.
Postmodernism states that we cannot accurately describe any culture completely because we will always be limited by our subjective perspectives and the perspectives of the informants that we use. They assert that there is always variation in representations of “reality” based on a person’s status. Postmodernists state that there is no one way of presenting history. A variety of historical interpretations are valid, depending on your position and your perspective. A person’s status/position should always be made explicit when writing historical or ethnographical papers/books. An individuals status in a society is critical in impacting their perspective of a society and its “reality” (i.e. what is their status).
Objective and Subjective knowledge:
The ordinary non-philosophical (i.e., oversimplified) view is that the word "subjective" is the complete opposite (negation or contradictory) of the word "objective." If something is subjective, it's not objective; if something is objective, it's not subjective. "Subjective" is thought to mean "from someone’s point of view." " Objective" means "not just from someone’s point of view." An objective matter is one that everyone (who is sane, rational, and appropriately informed) will agree about. "Subjectivity" connotes lack of objectivity. Ethical subjectivism is the view that since we can’t be "objective" about morality, morality must be purely "subjective."
Revisionist history
Accepted paradigms are questioned, researched and overthrown, links to objective and subjective knowledge. Most people, outside of academia, tend to view the history taught as being objective (accepted by anyone/everyone who is reasonable). However, especially since the postmodern movement of the 1960’s, most academics would acknowledge that much of the history we read is subjective. Historical accounts must be linked to the individual writing the history, their status, their time and place.
Anthropological Theory: Should the study of Humans be scientific or humanistic?
This is an ongoing debate in the anthropology. The debate centers around the goals of anthropology as well as epistemological issues (i.e. can we actually study humans scientifically, with all of the problems of subjectivity). This semester we will utilize both a scientific and humanistic approach to the study of the Celts. Two basic approaches, outlined below, reveal these two ways of studying human cultures. Cultural materialism is a theoretical orientation that focuses on a scientific approach to the study of humans and human institutions while symbolic anthropology focuses on a humanistic approach. Make sure to know the key aspects of each theoretical orientation.
Cultural Materialism: Formulated by Marvin Harris. Harris stated that humans can and should be studied scientifically (etic perspective- the outsider, scientific, ideally objective perspective). He states that human beliefs and practices can be explained by looking at the material (environmental and historical) conditions under which beliefs and practices arose. The environment constrains and shapes the ways humans work to fulfill basic needs. All customs and beliefs, no matter how exotic, can be explained rationally by looking at the material conditions under which they arose. All aspects of culture are integrated, and so each aspect of culture affects other aspects of culture. Harris states that the emic perspective (insider perspective- the subjective view of individuals inside the culture) is not very helpful in gaining insights into human beliefs and behaviors because he sees most humans everyday consciousness as being filled with “ignorance, fear and conflict.” He does not see most humans as being capable of discerning why they believe and act the way in which they do.
Cultural Materialism: Scientific approach, Etic perspective
- Goal is to find the cause and effect explanations for differences and similarities in beliefs and practices in cultural groups around the world.
- This theory sees the material and environmental constraints (conditions & constraints imposed by environment & technology) as leading to differences in beliefs & practices (beliefs are shaped by material conditions).
- Human believes and behaviors have developed from a material history that can explain what may seem to be irrational beliefs and behaviors but which in fact have a rational basis.
A materialist model of culture include three layers:
1) material foundation-economic mode of production, technology, population size
2) system of social organization, kinship patterns, marriage and family practices, politics, status differentiation
3) ideology or belief system, ideas, beliefs, values (both secular and sacred)
Symbolic: Symbolic anthropologists are fundamentally concerned with the ways in which people formulate their reality. The goal for symbolic anthropologists is to gain insight into the meanings relevant to the members of a culture. Symbolic anthropologists utilize a humanistic approach to gaining insights into human beings and cultures. They study people’s symbols, their literature, and their games. The emic perspective is highly valued in symbolic and humanistic anthropology. What people say about their cultural values and norms is considered very important.
Symbolic Anthropology: Humanistic, Emic perspective
- Goal is cultural interpretation, look to symbols, literature, games to gain insight into meanings & experiences of a culture
- What does it mean to be a human in a particular culture, get at the “essence of being human”
Case Example: The Prohibition on eating of beef in India
In the United States in the 1970’s economists were analyzing issues of poverty and hunger in India. It was observed that in India, where the majority of the people are Hindu, there is a religious prohibition on the eating of beef. In America beef is a major source of protein. Some analysts stated that if Indians would just give up this irrational food taboo that they would be able to alleviate their hunger problems. In other words, they were going hungry because of an irrational religious belief. It was observed that there was a surplus of cows in India and these cows could easily work to feed the people of India. Below is an analysis by cultural materialists and symbolic anthropologists into this issue.
Cultural Materialists: Marvin Harris looked into this issue and came to the conclusion that the prohibition on the eating and killing of cows is rational. Harris stated that you must look at the material conditions under which people live for explanations of food taboo’s. Remember Harris emphasizes the idea that humans are rational, and there are almost always rational explanations for the beliefs and practices that we have. He is most concerned with an etic analysis.
Harris stated that a prohibition on the eating of cows in India evolved over time because;
1)cows were essential as plow animals, if they were eaten in lean times, the people would starve eventually because they would have no means to plow their fields
2)cows were needed for reproduction, to produce more animals for the future
3)cows were needed for their dung; dung is used as a fertilizer, it is burned in cow patties as a source of heat and a means to cook food, and dung is mixed with water and made into a paste for flooring.
Symbolic Anthropologists: Are concerned with looking into the meaning that a symbol holds for a culture, they are concerned with the emic. Symbolic anthropologists note that the cow symbolizes life to Hindu’s. Cows “represents our soul, our obstinate intellect, and our unruly emotions, however the cow also supercedes us because it gives so much and yet takes nothing beyond grass and grain.” Ghandi “stated that cows made agriculture possible” and agriculture made life possible. Cows are viewed as a virtual sustainer of life for humans. Indians state that “if no other source of food existed humans could still survive on the cream, butter, milk provided by this animal.”