June 14, 1907] 



SCIENCE 



931 



satisfactorily in such a way that each 

 specimen can be seen. 



I do not consider it necessary to discuss 

 in greater detail the functions of the large 

 museum as an agency in promoting sci- 

 ence, because there can be little difference 

 of opinion in regard to this question. 

 "Wherever investigations are undertaken 

 that are based largely upon specimens 

 needing preservation, the work is neces- 

 sarily undertaken by a museum or by insti- 

 tutions closely affiliated with museums. It 

 may be pointed out, however, that the 

 strong tendency to accumulate specimens 

 has often been a disadvantage in the de- 

 velopment of anthropology, because, as was 

 pointed out before, there are many aspects 

 of this science in which the material ob- 

 jects are insignificant as compared with the 

 actual scientific questions involved. 



The experience of institutions like the 

 Field Museum of Natural History and the 

 United States National Museum shows 

 clearly that the necessity of accumulating 

 collections practically excludes important 

 aspects of anthropological work from the 

 field of museum activity. In former times 

 the American Museum of Natural History 

 followed a more liberal policy in this re- 

 spect, while at present the broader point of 

 view seems to be gradually becoming recog- 

 nized in the Field Museum ; but the rapid 

 changes of policy through which these in- 

 stitutions have passed show that anthro- 

 pology requires a broader point of view 

 for its field-work than that ofi'ered by the 

 strict requirements of the acquisition of 

 museum specimens. The only institution 

 in which the necessary freedom is offered 

 is the Bureau of American Ethnology, 

 which is not hampered by any requirement 

 of accumulating specimens through its 

 investigations. 



This same point of view brings it about 

 that museums of natural history are liable 

 to lay much greater stress upon systematic 



zoology and botany than upon detailed 

 anatomical study, the results of which can 

 not be exhibited equally well, and that the 

 study of functional traits is hardly ever 

 attempted, because it offers still greater 

 difficulties to the exhibitor. 



So far as the scientific administration 

 of museums is concerned, the principal 

 problem is that of the extension of museum 

 activities so as to overcome the limitations 

 set by the tendency to acquire a consider- 

 able number of specimens. 



I believe that among American museum 

 administrators Professor F. W. Putnam 

 deserves the highest credit for having been 

 the first to recognize the limitations of the 

 activity of the museum if restricted en- 

 tirely by the desire for the acquisition of 

 specimens, and for having courageously 

 set to the museum scientific problems 

 selected in accordance rather with their 

 scientific importance than with the prob- 

 ability of yielding many specimens. 



Bearing these points in view, the ques- 

 tion arises, in how far the interests of the 

 public and the interests of science can be 

 harmonized. It is my opinion that the 

 attempt at a thorough systematization of 

 a large museum must be given up, because 

 it is based upon a misconception of the 

 function of the large museum. Systematic 

 museums must be small museums. 



It is very probable that in a large mu- 

 seum in which the systematization of the 

 exhibit for the benefit of educational pur- 

 poses is made the principal point of view 

 the function of the individual curator will 

 become more and more that of an officer 

 who carries out the orders received from 

 the general museum administration, so that 

 there would hardly be room for investiga- 

 tors of the highest order in such an institu- 

 tion. That the systematization and popu- 

 larization of the collections of a large mu- 

 seum does not agree Avith the best interests 



