PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. HiO 



the theory of tlie developJiit'iit of tlie various ethnic groups or ' peoiiles ' of the 

 worki). A great impetus was given to the investigation of such niatt^ers by 

 Dr. Rivers in a uow famous Presidential Address to this Settion, followed up as 

 it was shortly afterwards by a monumental work on the ethnology of the Pacifio 

 region. But it would be quite a mistake to suppose that anthropologists were 

 not previously alive to the importance of the ethnological point of view as a 

 unifying interest in anthropological theory. As far back as 1891, when the 

 second Folklore Congress met in London under the presidency of the late 

 Andrew Lang, the burning question was how far a theory of diffusion and how 

 far a theory of independent origins would take us in the explanation of the 

 facts with which the science of folklore is more particularly concerned. It is 

 true that there has been in the past a tendency to describe the theory of inde- 

 pendent origins as the ' anthropological ' argimient ; but such a misnomer is 

 much to be regretted. Anthropology stands not for this line of explanation 

 or for that, but for the truth by whatever way it is reached; and Ethnology, 

 in the sense that I have given to the term, is so far from constituting the 

 antithesis of Anthropology that it is rather, as I have tried to show, its final 

 outcorne and consunmiation. Recognising this, the Oxford ydiool of Anthropo- 

 logy from the first insisted that candidates for the Diploma should face an 

 examination-paper in Ethnology, in wliich they must bring the various kinds 

 of evidence derived from physical type, from arts, from customs, and from 

 language to bear at once on the problem how the various ethnic individualities 

 have been formed. The result, I think, has been that our students have all 

 along recognised, even when most deeply immersed in one or other of their 

 spscial studies, a centripetal tendency, an orientation towards a common 

 scientific purpose, that has saved them from one-sidedness, and kept them loyal 

 to the interests of Anthropology as a whole. Let me add that, as our anthropo- 

 logical course ends in Ethnology, so it begins in Ethnography, by which I mean 

 the descriptive account of the various peoples considered mainly in their relation 

 to their geographical environment. Thus, from the beginning to the end of his 

 work, the student of Anthropology is reminded that he is trying to deal with 

 the varieties of human life in the concrete. He must first make acquaintance 

 with tliQ peoples of the world in their unanalysed diversity, must next proceed 

 to the separate consideration of the universal constituent aspects of their life, 

 and then finally must return to a concrete study of these peoples in order to 

 explahi, as well as he can, from every abstract point of view at once how they 

 have come to be what they, are. If this theoretical path be pursued, I have 

 little fear lest Anthropology appear to the man who has really given his mind 

 to it a thing of rags and tatters. 



The second way in which the unity of Anthropology may be made manifest 

 IS, as I have said, practical. The ideal University course in AnthropoWy 

 should aim directly and even primarily at producing the field-worker. °I 

 cannot go here into the question whether better work is done in the field 

 by large expeditions or by small. For educational purposes, however, I would 

 have every student imagine that he is about to proceed on an anthropological 

 expedition by himself. Every part of his work will gain in actuality if 

 he thinks of it as something likely to be of practical service hereafter; and 

 to judge from my own experience as a teacher, the presence in a class of 

 even a few ardent spirits who are about to enter the field, or, better still, 

 have already had field-experience and are equipping themselves for further 

 ehorts, proves infinitely inspiring alike to the class and to the teacher himself. 

 Once the future campaigner realises that he must prepare himself so as to 

 be able to collect and interpret any kind of evidence of anthropological vai- 

 that he comes across, he is bound to acquire in a practical way \nd as it 

 were instinctively a comprehensive grasp of the subject, such as cannot fail 

 to reinforce the demand for correlation and unification that comes from the 

 Side of theory. 



Let me at this point interpolate the remark that recruits for anthropological 

 held-service are to be sought among women students no less than amono- 

 men. We shall have an opportunity during the present meeting of concrratu" 

 lating Miss Freire-IMarreco, Miss Czaplicka, and ]\Irs. Scoreshv Rout]ed<'e— 

 all members of the Oxford School— <in the courage with which they have 

 braved all sorts of risks in order that anthropological science nii-lit be 



