father's parental instinct-interest just because he passes down the street from his home to his office. His business raid into his rival's market has the same naïve charm that tickled the heart of his remote ancestor when in the night he rushed the herds of a near-by clan. A manufacturer tries to tell a conventional world that he resists the closed shop because it is un-American, loses him money, or is inefficient. A few years ago he was more honest when he Isaid he would run his business as he wished and would allow no man to tell him what to do. His instinct of leadership, reinforced powerfully by his innate instinctive revulsion to the confinement of the closed shop, gave the true stimulus. His opposition is psychological, not ethical.

The importance to me of the description of the innate tendencies or instincts to be here given lies in their relation to my main explanation of economic behavior, which is:

1. That these instinct tendencies are persistent, are far less warped and modified by the environment than we believe; that they function quite as they have for a hundred thousand years; that they, as motives in their various normal or perverted habit form, can at times dominate singly the entire behavior and act as if they were a clear character dominant.

2. That if the environment through any of the conventional instruments of repression-such as extreme religious orthodoxy, economic inferiority, imprisonment or physical disfigurement, such as short stature or a crippled body-repress the full psychological expression in the field of the instinct tendencies, then a psychic revolt, a slipping into abnormal mental functioning, takes place, with the usual result that society accuses this revolutionist of being either wilfully inefficient, alchoholic, a syndicalist, supersensitive, an agnostic, or insane.

As a writer Professor Parker was of course hindered a great deal by an only half-conquered terminology and by the fierce onslaughts of revelations gleaned from his multifarious observations among the workers and from his strenuous reading of the scientific pioneers. It is much easier to cultivate an impeccable syntax and an esthetic urbanity if you have ideas less overwhelming and dangerous to manipulate. But despite the great obstacles created by the content itself and despite the few years given him, Carleton Parker gave certain definite evidence that he could write. His terse narrative of the tragic Wheatland ex

periences of the migratory laborers, with its unassuming vividness, its fine directness, and its honest, dignified, and well controlled indignation, is a sufficient earnest of his potentialities. As a conversationalist he had a captivating humor and homeliness which he had managed to inject occasionally into some of his unpublished writing and which some of us hoped would become in time a definite feature of his style to blend with the sterner qualities mentioned above. Lucidity he would have attained more and more, for his programme of self-discipline was growing daily more and more comprehensive.

Carleton Parker's most elaborate and trying experiences. and investigations and most of his published writing dealt mainly with the unskilled workmen. For years Professor Parker fraternized with, remonstrated with, studied and wrote about our I. W. W. concerning whose bare name so many people had hardly heard six months ago. Professor Parker belonged to a group of radicals which searches for the roots of things with all the scientific acumen and technique at its command. These radicals are working fearlessly and tirelessly for the best interests of the United States. Their worth has been clearly recognized by our great President who has drawn many of them to Washington to help him with the war against Prussian materialism and autocracy and to help him in the construction of the new government by experts which is so rapidly displacing the government by lawyers and by captains of finance. It is for work of this kind that Professor Parker ungrudgingly gave his life. Undoubtedly Carleton Parker's most permanent contribution to science and to his country was his amazing ability to turn all sorts and conditions of men and women from hedonists, cynics, sentimentalists, predatory egoists, and dilettantes into devoted workers for humanity. The healthy contagion of his personality is well exemplified by

2The California Casual and His Revolt," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, xxx, 110-126, 1916. I refer here to the first section, pp. 110-115.

some sentences in a letter which I recently received from Mr. H. R. Mussey, managing editor of The Nation:

Though I have met Parker but twice, he made a deep impression on me by reason of his rare combination of lovable and serviceable qualities. Your letter was the first intimation I had received of his death and it comes to me bringing a sense not only of profound regret but of personal loss as well. In the history of economic thought there has been a remarkable series of losses of young and promising men, and Parker's is by no means the least.

A devoted friend, Mr. Max Rosenberg, just returning from the East, writes me as follows:

Carl's death has been a blow, not only here in the West, but I realize now too the impression Carl had made on the lives of many people in the East and how keenly they have felt his loss.

Professor Parker's recent trip across our continent has been characterized by one of his colleagues as a triumphal tour. At university after university he was offered tempting positions. Philosophers, psychologists, biologists, economists, however much they chose to disagree with the details of his theory, were captivated by his geniality, inspired by his fearlessness, and impressed by the rare scientific promise of his societal diagnosis. For all the tragedy of his sudden death it may be said quite literally that his work has only begun. He has left behind him a host of men and women, old and young, employers, employees, students, ministers, lawyers, scientists, whose lives have been made vastly different by his life, who are determined to carry on work like his very much as he laid down the programme, who will carry it on with recurrent acknowledgments of indebtedness to him, and who love to quote as he loved to quote the words of Woodrow Wilson:

"We are in a temper to reconstruct economic society as we were once in a temper to reconstruct political society."

ETHNOLOGY AND HISTORY*

PAUL RADIN

It is now more than two generations since Tylor wrote his classical work on Primitive Culture. For many years the impetus he gave to ethnology showed itself mainly in the theoretical discussions with which his name is so intimately associated-animism and cultural survivals. Dominated as his generation in England was by the doctrine of organic evolution, these discussions soon found themselves framed in the terminology of the biological sciences. The facts so rapidly accumulating through the enthusiasm of many indefatigable workers were welcomed not so much for what light they might shed upon the historical development of the individual cultures to which they belonged, as for what they might tell us concerning the much larger subject of the evolution of human institutions. A true historical chronology was unfortunately not to be had, but transferring the zoological concept of survivals to the field of ethnology, the early theorists developed the much abused and much overestimated comparative method.

In a larger sense the evolutionary method was historical, but as applied to the development of culture it proved utterly inadequate. It stopped short in its interpretation of the great Caucasian and Mongolian civilizations at the very

Ethn

* This article was read by the author, Professor of Anthropology at Mills College, California, as one of a series of lectures on ology and History" delivered by him at the University of California during the second half of the university year, 1917-18.

point where the historian's interest began and curiously enough, postulated for primitive peoples a fixity and unchangeableness which, in the last analysis, was utterly unhistorical. This contradiction it seems plausible to explain only upon the assumption of a confusion between anthropology (the comparative study of the human organism and the races of man) and ethnology (the cultural manifestations of people), a confusion quite intelligible when it is remembered that the founders of ethnology in England were mainly anatomists and biologists. In Germany where this was not the case and where the dominating influence in the sixties of the last century was the critical-historical school of Ranke, the important ethnological work produced, that of G. Waitz, bore an historical-psychological im

press.

Unfortunately whatever may have been the causes, the evolutionary viewpoint and its corollary the comparative method, gained a complete victory and prevailed for a long time and still prevails, in a large measure, in ethnology. As our knowledge of primitive people deepened and the facts increased, certain refinements in interpretation naturally manifested themselves and a descriptive, vaguely historical trend crept into the monographs. That the evolutionary method was not, however, inherently correct for ethnology dawned upon no one. This was perhaps natural, for no historian since Waitz had busied himself with it. Professor Boas was the first definitely to interpret ethnology in terms of cultural manifestations of specific tribes and on the assumption of cultural dissemination. He was perhaps the first one to apply systematically to the study of primitive peoples two of the cardinal points of the historical method-the uniqueness of historical occurrences and the existence of centers of diffusion. Owing, however, to the absence of any definite chronology, ethnology found itself deprived at the outset of what constituted the backbone of history proper and had thus to fall back, in order to establish even a vague time sequence, upon the analytical study