gearrae 
of heredity and environment. 
OcTOBER 16, 1913] 
NATURE 
209 
of anthropology aims at such a presentation and ex- 
planation of the physical and mental facts about any 
given species or even group of mankind as may cor- 
‘rectly instruct those to whom the acquisition of such 
knowledge may be of use. 
In this instance, as in 
the case of the other sciences, the man of science en- 
deavours to acquire and pass on abstract knowledge, 
which the man of affairs can confidently apply in the 
daily business of practical life. 
_ It will have been observed that an accurate pre- 
sentation of the physical and mental characteristics of 
any species of mankind which it is desired to study is 
wholly dependent on accurate inquiry and report. Let 
no one suppose that such inquiry is a matter of instinct 
or intuition, or that it can be usefully conducted em- 
Pirically or without due reference to the experiences of 
others; in other words, without sufficient preliminary 
study. So likely indeed are the uneducated in such 
matters to observe and record facts about human 
beings inaccurately, or even wrongly, that about a 
fourth part of the ‘‘Notes and Queries”’ is taken up 
with showing the inquirer how to proceed, and in 
exposing the pitfalls into which he may unconsciously 
fall. The mainspring of error in anthropological 
observation is that the inquirer is himself the product 
This induces him to 
read himself, his own unconscious prejudices and in- 
herited outlook on life, into the statements made to 
him by those who view life from perhaps a totally 
different and incompatible standpoint. To the extent 
that the inquirer does this, to that extent are his 
_ observations and report likely to be inaccurate and 
misleading. To avoid error in this respect, previous 
training and study are essential, and so the ‘‘ Notes 
and Queries on Anthropology,” a guide compiled in 
cooperation by persons long familiar with the subject, 
is as strong and explicit on the point of how to 
inquire as on that of what to inquire about. 
Let me explain that these statements are not in- 
tended to be taken as made ex cathedrd, but rather as 
_ the outcome of actual experience of mistakes made in 
the past. Time does not permit me to go far into 
‘this point, and I must limit myself to the subject 
of sociology for my illustration. If a man under- 
takes to inquire into the social life of a people or tribe 
as a subject apart, he is committing an error, and his 
report will almost certainly be misleading. Such an 
investigator will find that religion and technology are 
inextricably mixed up with the sociology of any given 
tribe, that religion intervenes at every point not only 
of sociology but also of language and technology. In 
fact, just as in the case of all other scientific research, 
the phenomenon observable by the anthropologist are 
not the result of development along any single line 
alone, but of a progression in a main general direc- 
tion, as influenced, and it may be even deflected, by 
contact and environment. 
If again the inquirer neglects the simple but essential 
practice of taking notes, not only fully, but also im- 
mediately or as nearly so as practicable, he will find 
that his memory of facts, even after a short time, 
has become vague, inexact, and incomplete, which 
means that reports made from memory are more likely 
to be useless than to be of any scientific value. If 
voluntary information or indirect and accidental cor- 
robation are ignored, if questions are asked and 
answers accepted without discretion, if exceptions are 
mistaken for rules, then the records of an inquiry may 
well mislead and thus become worse than useless. If 
leading or direct questions are put without due caution, 
and if the answers are recorded without reference to 
the natives’ and not the inquirer’s mode of classifying 
things, crucial errors may easily arise. Thus, in many 
parts of the world, the term ‘‘mother”’ includes all 
female relatives of the past or passing generation, 
NO. 2294, VOL. 92] 
and the term “‘brother"’ the entire brotherhood. Such 
expressions as ‘‘brother’’ and ‘‘sister’’ may and do 
constantly connote relationships which are not recog- 
nised at all amongst us. The word “marriage” may 
include ‘“‘irrevocable betrothal,” and so on; and it is 
very easy to fall into the trap of the mistranslation 
of terms of essential import, especially in the use of 
words expressing religious conceptions. The con- 
| ception of godhead has for so long been our inheritance 
that it may be classed almost as instinctive. It is 
| nevertheless still foreign to the instincts of a large 
portion of mankind. 
If also, when working among the uncultured, the 
inquirer attempts to ascertain abstract ideas, except 
through concrete instances, he will not succeed in his 
purpose for want of representative terms. And lastly, 
| if he fails to project himself sufficiently into the minds 
of the subjects of inquiry, or to respect their prejudices, 
or to regard seriously what they hold to be sacred, or 
to keep his countenance while practices are being 
described which to him may be disgusting or ridiculous 
—if indeed he fails in any way in communicating to 
his informants, who are often super-sensitively sus- 
picious in such matters, the fact that his sympathy is 
not feigned—he will also fail in obtaining the anthropo- 
logical knowledge he is seeking. In the words of the 
“Notes and Queries” on this point, ‘‘ Nothing is easier 
than to do anthropological work of a certain sort, but 
to get to the bottom of native customs and modes of 
thought, and to record the results of inquiry in such 
| a manner that they carry conviction, is work which 
can be only carried out properly by careful attention.” 
The foregoing considerations explain the scope of 
our studies and the requirements of the preliminary 
inquiries necessary to give those studies value. The 
further question is the use to which the results can 
be put. The point that at once arises here for the 
immediate purpose is that of the conditions under 
which the British Empire is administered. We are 
here met together to talk scientifically, that is, as pre- 
cisely as we can: and so it is necessary to give a 
definition to the expression ‘“‘ Imperial Administration,” 
especially as it is constantly used for the government 
of an empire, whereas in reality it is the government 
that directs the administration. In this address I use 
the term ‘‘administration” as the disinterested 
management of the details of public affairs. This ex- 
cludes politics from our purview, defining that term 
as the conduct of the government of a country accord- 
ing to the opinions or in the interests of a particular 
group or party. 
Now in this matter of administration the position of 
the inhabitants of the British Isles is unique. It falls 
to their lot to govern, directly or indirectly, the lives 
of members of nearly every variety of the human race. 
Themselves Europeans by descent and intimate con- 
nection, they have a large direct interest in every other 
general geographical division of the world and its 
inhabitants. It is worth while to pause here for a 
moment to think, and to try and realise, however 
dimly, something of the task before the people of 
this country in the government and control of what are 
known as the subject races. ; 
For this purpose it is necessary to throw our glance 
over the physical extent of the British Empire. In 
the first place, there are the ten self-governing com- 
ponents of the Dominion of Canada and that of New- 
foundland in North America, the six colonial States in 
the Commonwealth of Australia, with the Dominion 
of New Zealand in Australasia, and the four divi- 
sions of the Union of South Africa. All these may be 
looked upon as indirectly administered portions of the 
British Empire. Then there is the mediatised govern- 
ment of Egypt, with its appanage, the directly British 
‘ administered Sudan, which alone covers about a 
