4:60 TRANSACTIONS OF SECTION H. 



continue tu accoin|ilisli ilself, if we, wlio make Antliropology our chief concern, 

 continue to put forth good work in abundance. For, like any other S5cience, 

 the science of man must be justified of its children. 



Now, it is customary to contrast what are known as technical studie.'* with 

 University studies proper ; and such a distinction may prove helpful in the 

 present context, if it be not unduly pressed. Thus, in particular, it will afford 

 me an excuse for not attempting to travel afresh over the ground covered by 

 Sir Eichard Temple in his admirable Presidential Address of three years ago. 

 What he then demanded was, as he termed it, a school of Applied Anthropology, 

 in which men of affairs could learn how to regulate their practical relations with 

 so-called ' natives ' for the benefit of all concerned. Let me say at once that I 

 am in complete agreement with him as to the need for the establishment or 

 further development of not one school only but many such schools in this 

 coimtry, if the British Empire is to make good a moral claim to exist. Indeed, 

 I have for a number of years at Oxford taken a hand in the anthropological 

 instruction of probationers and officers belonging to the public services, and can 

 bear witness to the great interest which students of this class took at the time, 

 and after leaving Oxford have continued to take, in studies bearing so directly 

 on their life-work. 



What I have to say to-day, however, must be regarded as complementary 

 rather than as immediately .subsidiary to Sir Richard Temple's wise and politic 

 contention. The point I wish to make is that, unless Anthropology be given its 

 due place among University studies proper, there is little or no chance that 

 technical applications of anthropological knowledge will prove of the slightest 

 avail, -whether attempted within our Universities or outside them. Anthropo- 

 logy must be studied in a scientific spirit, that is, for its own sake ; and then 

 the practical results will follow in due course. Light first, fruit afterwards, as 

 Bacon says. So it has always been, and must always be, as regards the associa- 

 tion of science with the arts of life. That Sir Richard Temple will heartily 

 subscribe to such a principle I have no doubt at all. As a man of affairs, 

 however, whose long and wide experience of administration and of the problems 

 of empire had convinced him of the iitility of the anthropological habit of mind 

 to the official who has to deal with ' all sorts and conditions of men,' he 

 naturally insisted on the value of Anthropology in its applied character. On the 

 other hand, it is equally natural that one whose career has been wholly 

 academic should lay emphasis on the other side of the educational question, 

 maintaining as an eminently practical proposition — for what can be more prac- 

 tical than to «ducate the nation on -sound lines ? — the necessity of establishing 

 Anthropology among the leading studies of our Universities. 



How, then, is this end to be attained ? The all-important condition of 

 success, in my belief, is that all branches of anthropological study and research 

 should be concentrated within a single School. For it is conceivable that a 

 University may seek to satisfy its conscience in regard to the teaching of 

 Anthropology by trusting to the scattered efforts of a number of faculties and 

 institutions, each of which is designed in the first instance to fulfil some other 

 purpose. Thus for Physical Anthropology a would-be student must resort to 

 the medical school, for Social Anthropology to the faculty of arts, for 

 Linguistics to the department of philology, for Prehistorics to the archaeological 

 museum, and so on. Such, a policy, to my mind, is a downright insult to our 

 science. Is the anthropologist no better than a tramp, that he should be 

 expected to hang about academic back-doors in search of broken victuals? Fed 

 on a farrago of heterogeneous by-products, how can the student ever be taught 

 to envisage his subject as a whole? How, for instance, is he ever to acquire the 

 comprehensive outlook of the competent field-worker ? Such a makeshift arrange- 

 ment can at the most but produce certain specialists of the narrower sort. In 

 ' The Hunting of the Snark ' they engaged a baker who could only bake bride- 

 cake. Anthropological expeditions have, perhaps, been entrusted before now to 

 experts of this type ; but they have not proved an entire success. I am not 

 ashamed to declare that the anthropologist, be he field-worker or study-worker — 

 and, ideally, he should be both in one — must be eomethins of a Jackof -all-trades. 

 This statement, of course, needs qualification, inasmuch as I would have him 

 know everything about something as well as something about everything. But 



