H.—ANTHROPOLOGY. 157 
qualified to undertake the task of interpreting culture. It is a task that 
belongs not to psychology but to sociology. Dr. Haddon’s attempt 
eame too soon in the history of anthropology. 
As France led the way in the development of the theoretical study of 
comparative sociology, we might have expected that it would be in France 
that the new methods of field-work would be elaborated. The work of 
Doutté in Morocco was an early step in that direction, and the later work 
of Réné Maunier is a good example of the new methods. Marcel Granet’s 
important work on China is based rather on the study of Chinese documents 
than on observation of the living culture. But the French apparently 
are not drawn very strongly towards ethnographical research. 
At the present time it is only in the work of a small but increasing 
number of investigators that the new methods are illustrated. I can 
indicate the work of Prof. Malinowski and of Dr. Margaret Mead. But 
during the next few years we may expect to see the publication of a good 
deal of work carried out on these lines. 
An objection that is and can be raised against this kind of work is 
that there is a great deal of room for the personal equation of the investi- 
gator to influence the results. That is true and must be recognised, but 
its importance can easily be exaggerated. A remedy, not perhaps perfect 
_ but very valuable, will lie in the development of a technique or method- 
ology of interpretation, whereby the validity of a particular interpretation 
can perhaps be demonstrated by crucial facts or at any rate tested in 
such a way as to reduce, if not eliminate, the effects of the personal 
equation. The elaboration of this technique is one of the problems that 
face us at the present time, one of the urgent needs of our science. The 
multiplication of studies of this kind, by bringing a larger number of 
observers into the field, and by providing us in some instances with 
observations in one region by two independent workers, and also the 
oceasional co-operation of two or more persons in one investigation, will 
all help towards the elimination of the effects of the personal equation. 
But the most important thing of all in this direction will be the develop- 
_ ment of sociological theory which will afford a guide to the field-worker 
in his studies and assist him to obtain both objectivity and completeness 
in his observations. 
An adequate sociological understanding or interpretation of any culture 
can only be attained by relating the characteristics of that culture to 
known sociological laws. These laws can of course only be discovered by 
the comparative method, 7.e. by the study and comparison of many 
diverse types of culture. The procedure in our science must therefore 
depend on the building up of a body of theories or hypotheses relating to 
all aspects of culture or social life and the testing of these hypotheses by 
intensive field research. The field-worker of the future, or indeed of the 
present, must be thoroughly cognisant of all the sociological hypotheses 
that are partly verified, and if possible of those in course of elaboration, 
and must direct his research to the testing ot these hypotheses, either his 
own or those of other workers in the science, by their application to a 
particular culture. Only in this way can the hypotheses be tested and 
either verified, rejected, or modified ; and the normal result will probably 
be modification rather than complete verification or complete rejection. 
