Globus: Globus, 72.1897

Bibliographische Daten

Zeitschrift

Strukturtyp:: Zeitschrift

Werks-URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714784

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714784

Persistenter Identifier:: BV041217508

Titel:: Globus

Untertitel:: illustrierte Zeitschrift für Länder- und Völkerkunde

Weitere Titel:: Globus

Erscheinungsort:: Braunschweig

Verlag:: Vieweg

Erscheinungsjahr:: 1862

Sammlung:: Zeitschriften und Zeitungen > Zeitschriften zur Ethnologie

Wissensgebiet:: Sozial- und Kulturanthropologie > Allgemeines

Zeitschriftenband

Strukturtyp:: Zeitschriftenband

Werks-URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-709044

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-709044

Persistenter Identifier:: DE-11-001785752

Titel:: Globus, 72.1897

Verlag:: Vieweg

Erscheinungsjahr:: 1897

Signatur:: LA 3252-72

Sammlung:: Zeitschriften und Zeitungen > Zeitschriften zur Ethnologie

Vorderer Einband

Strukturtyp:: Vorderer Einband

Sammlung:: Zeitschriften und Zeitungen > Zeitschriften zur Ethnologie

Bibliographia 653 ^■part from the diversities that marked the different civilizations, religion was the main Ca usal factor in man’s rise from a primitive to a civilized existence. Religion, moreover, re mained the dominant theme and sustainer of the new way of life for it served “to give the settlers in great river valleys the courage to clear the land, to keep it cleared, and t° bring the water to it” (p. 177). Although in most instances this water-cult type of religion degenerated into gods a nd goddesses of agriculture and fertility, it is found to this day in India, though there J t might derive from “an earlier more explicit cult made by priests to keep alive in people’s min ds the devotion to water” (p. 178). Water worship itself, therefore, “is not a permanent ail d inherent feature of religion in civilized societies. Its great importance was temporary, though probably not shortlived, at its maximum at those seven crucial episodes” (p. 178). Coulborn finds great difficulty in differentiating primitive from civilized societies. ^°re than once, quantitative and qualitative differences are outlined only to be ques tioned and hedged in so many ways as to leave the reader much in doubt. In the end, d is very difficult to pin him down as to what specifically differentiates civilized from P ri mitive societies. Take writing for instance. Although writing was invented by civilized P e °ples, primitives, however, have mnemonic devices and other symbolic conventional devices of communication. The one instance, that of the Cherokee genius Sequoya, who ffivented the Cherokee syllabary, is cited to demonstrate “the competence of primitives ^° r this very special task” (p. 180). From the other characteristics that are weighed and ° u nd wanting by Coulborn, the cyclical rise and fall, the fast rate of change, the greater c °ntrol over the physical environment, are all quantitative measurements the verdict ° n 'which is ultimately a matter of private opinion. He concedes that actual or “stimulus diffusion” (Kroeber) may transmit any culture trait from a civilized to a primitive milieu. The author is a great believer in diffusion. “Diffusion can carry large complexes ... r°m one society to another ... It can even be world wide, given a long enough time ... ten it is difficult to know whether the appearance of a certain trait in a certain society ^as due to diffusion or to separate invention, but, where there is doubt, I incline toward fusion, especially in the case of any intricate complex or association of traits. Diffusion ^ as n evev a cause or means of origin of a civilized society, but only a vehicle of its spread” 1 (P- 23). It is on this last mentioned matter that Coulborn critically attacks Heine- Ei -Dern. Despite the latter’s protest, he accuses him of deriving all civilization what ever from the Near East of the Old World. “Heine-Geldern... is not aware of differences ln style, or he thinks them mere differences of detail not important enough to need ® x Planation” (p. 29). Aside from these unfair misinterpretations, without any proof, °Ulborn’s illogical and purely arbitrary interpretation on the origin of civilized socie- ties to do diff c an be seen in his own unsupported dogmatic statements : “Diffusion had nothing with the origin of the primary civilized societies, or of any civilized societies. The ha USl0n which brought particular culture traits to the primary civilized societies could wffi 6 n °thi n g to do with their origin, for it occurred after their origin. The diffusion bef WaS ™P or t an t to the primary civilized societies is the diffusion which occurred e their origin, spreading many mesolithic practices throughout the world and a v j t>er earl y agricultural practices over large regions. In that diffusion the cultural Uosity of the Near East of the Old World was of capital importance, but it had no fft bearing upon the origin of civilized societies in the manner supposed by Heine- di r , Geld er n” (p. 29 1). Sapienti sat ! Sylvester A. Sieber. Italicized by the reviewer.

Zugriffsbeschränkung

Nutzungslizenz

Objekt: Scripture with scripture compared

Zeitschrift

Zeitschriftenband

Vorderer Einband

Inhaltsverzeichnis

Downloads

Ganzer Datensatz

Diese Seite

Seitenauswahl

Bildfragment

Formate und Verlinkungen

Links

Zitieren

Ganzer Datensatz

Diese Seite

Zitierempfehlung