Download - Leslie Alvin White

Leslie Alvin White, 1900-1975Author(s): Elman R. Service, Richard K. Beardsley, Beth DillinghamSource: American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 78, No. 3 (Sep., 1976), pp. 612-629Published by: Blackwell Publishing on behalf of the American Anthropological AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/674423Accessed: 09/10/2009 20:04

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Blackwell Publishing and American Anthropological Association are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to American Anthropologist.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/674423?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black

612 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [78,1976 ]

first instanee in print ( 1925b) to advoeate that important use of eulture as a variable in psyehologieal study.

In 19 24 White deeided that sociology would be his field and he moved to the famous department at the University of Chieago. Soeiology there ineluded anthropology, and inasmueh as White had beeome involved in summer field sessions among the Keresan Indians of New Mexieo under the aegis of Elsie Clews Parsons, he found himself leaning toward ethnology. His Ph.D. dissertation, "Medieine Soeieties of the Southwest,'7 was rejeeted as not theoretieal e n ough by Professor Ellsworth Faris, soeiologist and departmental ehairman, and the ensuing disagreements among the faeulty helped preeipitate the formation of the separate department of anthropology under Professor Fay-Cooper Cole in 1927.

White's first post was a joint appointment at the Buffalo Museum of Seienee and the University of Buffalo, 1927-30. The proximity of the reservation of the Seneea Indians led to an interest in them and their early ethnographer, Lewis H. Morgan. White soon beeame eonvineed that eontemporary anthropology had alternately maligned or ignored Morgan unjustly, espeeially in mis- understanding his evolutionism, and he spent a great amount of time for many subsequent years working on the large eolleetion of personal doeuments Morgan had saved. He eontinued his field work in New Mexico in the summers.

In 1930 he moved to the University of Miehigan (sueceeding Julian H. Steward ), where he taught until retirement in 1970. In 1931 he married Mary Pattison, his former student at the University of Buffalo.

Although White 's name is elosely as- soeiated with the University of Michigan beeause of his 40 years there, he was much at odds with the university administration in the troubled depression and war years. From 1932 until 1943 he remained at the rank of assoeiate professor and was only "aeting" ehairman of the department until 1944. He stayed on in the faee of these diseourage- ments beeause he had nowhere to go, inas- much as his eritieisms of Boasian anthropology were arousing hostility against him in other anthropology departments.l

But what the university administration did not perceive in those days was the intelleetual impaet of White's eourses on great numbers of undergraduate students from departments as various as English, Journalism, Philosophy, and History. His

LESLIE ALVIN WHITE 1900-1975

Leslie White died suddenly of a heart attack near Death Valley, California, on 31 March 1975. He had been in poor health for several years, having suffered several minor strokes and associated small heart attacks. He had been well enough, however, to continue his research and writing schedule in his office at the University of California, Santa Barbara, with but brief hospitaliza- tions. He had no immediate survivors.

White was born at Salida, Colorado, 19 January 1900. Son of a rather peripatetic surveyor and sometime tenant farmer, he spent most of his boyhood in rural Kansas and Louisiana. Following service in the U.S. Navy, he entered Louisiana State University, but after two years he transferred to Columbia University, where he took his B.A. and M.A. degrees in psychology in 1923 and 1924. He did not study any anthropology at Columbia. He said later that his most important intellectual experiences in those years occurred at the New School for Social Research, where he took courses from Alex- ander Goldenweiser, William I. Thomas, Thorstein Veblen, and John B. Watson. It is interesting that as a psychology student he wrote in 1923-24 a precocious article called "Personality and Culture "-apparently the

OBlTUARIES

large "culturology " course, "The Mind of Primitive Man," was making him well-known among the campus intellectuals, and this had the effect of creating a big demand for him as a speaker before various clubs and intellectual organizations. He gave freely of his time and energy to make these appearances and worked hard on the preparation of his talks-as he always did on his regular courses, as well.

It is good to remember in these days of academic cynicism that White's great success among undergraduates seems to all of those I have consulted to have been due entirely to the basic intellectual quality of the courses rather than to a faddistic subject or to showmanship. They were very "hard " courses, containing what have come to be seen in his later publications on the same subject as concepts and theories of great relevance to philosophy and science in general, as well as to broad theory in anthropology. But attractive as they were to the best students, they dismayed some others, most usually the devoutly religious (as some anthropology courses are bound to do). For this reason, the Catholic church in Ann Arbor singled out White for virulent attack, even pressuring state legislators for his dismissal. Thus he was for a long time the despair of the university's administration-a Mencken-like controversial figure,2 ever "agin the interests."

But those students who knew him at closer hand-mostly anthropology majors and, later, graduate students-were always struck by how paradoxically different he was from what his public reputation had suggested. His mordant lectures, his radical- populist political attitudes, and the assertive style of some of his critical essays gave exactly the opposite impression from his immediate, "real " personality, which was that of a smallish, quiet, shy, very myopic pure scholar. (A reporter from the student newspaper exclaimed to me after her inter- view with White: "Why, he 's sweet ! ") He was always warm and friendly and socially very generous to his students-some of the best of times were held at his house, with the collaboration of his equally generous wife.

Another aspect of his personality that attracted many people-not only students- was his marvelous sense of humor. He was not a joke-cracker, josher, or story teller (although he had some marvelously enter- taining reminiscences), but somehow he was low-keyed, deliciously dry, ironical, and often wryly self-deprecatory in a unique "Whitean mix."

In the hope that an obituary might be a good place to correct some widely held but

erroneous assumptions about White, the 613 following paragraphs will be devoted to some facts about his theories. In particular, it is necessary to state an important distinc- tion between his two major theories that he himself always observed but which somehow get tangled up in many anthropologists ' heads: Culturology, the science of culture as he presented it, is not the same thing as, nor does it even imply any connection to, his ideas about the evolution of culture. A comparison of his two major theoretical works, The Science o f Culture and The Evolution of Culture, should make this clear. He felt that his major contribution had been, not evolutionary theory, but culturology, and he was pleased when the concept finally made Webster's International Dictionary, and that he contributed the articles on it for the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (1968c) and the 15th edition of the Encyclopaed ia Britannica ( 1974a).

White disliked being so standardly classed with Childe and Steward as the "neoevolutionist" triumvirate. He saw little resem- blance between his work and theirs, and he insisted repeatedly that his thinking about evolution was not "neo-," and did "not differ one whit in principle from that expressed in Tylor's Anthropology in 1881 " (1959a:ix). His most startling and un- expected statement of this sort occurred spontaneously as he began his speech on the occasion of his acceptance of the Viking Medal in 1959. He had been introduced as a "neoevolutionist," with the implication that for this reason he was awarded the medal, and he was quick with a stern disclaimer.

White's early students were excited by his stand against anthropology 's current antievolutionism. We eagerly awaited his positive offering on evolutionary theory, but his only book on the subject, The Evolution o f Culture, never appeared until 1959, 25 years after it was broached, and it was dis- appointing to many. It was not written in his usual sparkling style, and it contained more of a functionalist message than evolution. He fully realized how the book seemed to be an anticlimax after all those years of making claims for evolutionism, and soon he was to write (1960b:xi):

A few decades ago the opponent of antievolutionism had to fight a series of propositions designed to refute evolutionist theory such as "the facts of diffusion- ism negate evolutionism," "evolutionist theory was borrowed from biology and adapted to cultural phenomena," "the Australians had a crude technology but an advanced social system," etc. The opponent of these theories had to adapt

614 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST

study of which would be culturology, very [78,1976]

himself to the propositions advanced by

the Boasian antievolutionists and was

therefore restricted in his scope and

perspective. Yet it seems evident now that the most

credit White has received in contemporary

anthropological circles is related to his

courageous affirmation of l9th century

evolutionism, opposing the negative stand of

American anthropology toward that

important legacy. For example, Bohannan

and Glazer (1973:333) said:

Leslie White for years stood alone in his

conviction that evolutionary theory as

expounded by Herbert Spencer, Lewis H.

Morgan, and Edward Tylor was the begin-

ning of the right track for a science of

culture. He can now look about him in

full awareness that the whole field knows

he was right.

This last sentence seems rather excessive, but

certainly White gave critical impetus at the

right time to help reestablish the legitimacy

of evolutionary thinking. White took more positive pride, in fact, in

his culturological essays gathered in The

Science of Culture (1949a), and especially

that there existed a good objective measure

of their broad intellectual significance; that

is, that several of the essays were reprinted

many times in prestigeful publications

representing a variety of disciplines. By this

measure his 1940 article, "The Symbol: The

Origin and Basis of Human Behavior," was

his best, having been reprinted at least 21

times in anthropology, sociology, linguistics,

philosophy, and social psychology collec-

tions. Also important by this measure are

the following, all related to his culturological

theme: "Man's Control Over Civilization: an

Anthropocentric Illusion" (reprinted six

times); "The Definition and Prohibition of

Incest" (five times); "On the Use of Tools

by Primates" (four times). These seem to

have been the most often reprinted, but

many others were reprinted at least two or

three times. Who else in the history of

anthropology has had so many articles re-

printed so often? White felt strongly that he had made a

theoretical breakthrough with his concep-

tion of culturology. One of his greatest

intellectural debts-in addition to the evolu-

tionism he attributed to Tylor, Morgan, and

Spencer, and to the idea of a "science of

culture" attributed to Tylor-was to

Spencer's organismic analogy of structure-

function. But Spencer's "superorganic" had

to do with the collectivity, society, not

culture, and White felt that his own

important achievement was to make the

organismic analogy apply to this latter, the

different from sociology. But he had also

borrowed, more or less unwittingly, he

recently said, Spencer's utilitarian view of

the functions and purposes of the institu-

tions and parts of society, so that he was

repeatedly to state that culture's purpose

was to make life "secure, perpetual, and

worthwhile for the human species," or other

similar expressions of its utility. Just a few years ago he realized, almost as

a revelation, that this rather unexamined

utilitarian view was not compatible with his

general theory of culturology at all. Culture

itself is the integrated structural system

ad3usting its conflicting parts and vectors in

attempted self-maintenance; with the human

beings, far from necessarily being aided or

made secure by culture, frequently be-

coming its victims as they are destroyed in

irrational wars, revolutions, famines, and

depressions. His enthusiasm for this new and

difficult intellectual departure from Spencer

was so great that he laid aside his burden-

some project on capitalism to devote full

time to the idea of "culture as a system." He

finished the manuscript just before his

death .3 Probably the greatest amount of time and

effort in White's early career was spent on

fieldwork and library research connected

with his five ethnological monographs. An-

thropologists conversant with the militant

secrecy of the Keresan Indians of the

American Southwest consider these writings

on them to be excellent and important, as

well as remarkable achievements, given the

difficulties. Yet the most usual complaints

by some others are about these same mono-

graphs. It has been said so often (and to

White 's great exasperation ) that his field-

work had no relationship to his theoretical

works; theory was not united with practice,

so to speak. Julian Steward actually counted

the pages in White's monographs devoted to

technology and economics and found them

to be very few compared to the great

amount devoted to religion; so, he asked (in

a seminar at Columbia, 1946-47), why does

White stress technology so much in his

evolutionary theory? White's answer to this

kind of criticism was that his field investiga-

tion was not an illustration of any theory:

he was trying only to discover, unearth, and

describe the old, aboriginal culture as ac-

curately as possible, and of this culture it is

mostly religion that remains; and it is care-

fully hidden from outsiders, whereas tech-

nology, economy, and many other such

visible things are not aboriginal, but mostly

Spanish or modern American. White's field-

work was mostly of the confidential-

informant kind, based on a hard-won form

OBITUARIES 615

of trust that he was able to achieve with a few Indians whom he had convinced that the information would be valuable to preserve.4 But the aim, as he stated it, was only descriptive, and of necessity "Boasian" and "particularistic"-how else would you do it? What other aim would there be for this kind of "salvage ethnography? " (White 's objec- tion to Boasian anthropology was not that they did descriptive fieldwork, but to the lack of cultural theory useful for more general intellectual purposes, and to the negativism toward such theory.)

Another kind of ethnology also interested White, however, one which "united theory with practice" precisely because it was able to study a currently functioning culture, and with very important general consequences, both practical and scientific. He had always thought that anthropology should have more relevance to modern civilizational problems, that the culturological analysis should be useful in understanding a whole modern national culture, not just its out-of-the-way "folk" villages. This was the main point of his American Anthropological Association Presidential Address in 1964, as well as the reason for his valiant attempt of more than 20 of his last years to subject "modern capitalism" to culturological scrutiny. This interest began early: he said that as a student he studied psychology, then switched to sociology, finally to anthropology, all because of his intense desire to find out why nations behaved as they did. This progres- sion of disciplines, of course, was due to his gradual realization that culture was the appropriate subject matter for him, not the psychology of people in either its individual or collective aspects.

Another important personal characteristic relevant to an understanding of White's work was his strong feeling against the academic schools of thought developed through close personal associations. He believed that they were inimical to the intellectual progress of a discipline, and this was a major reason for his reactions against the Boas school and Radcliffe-Brown's school of British social anthropology.S In order to discourage the rise of an ingrown "Michigan school" (because students' enthusiasm does always threaten this), he made these rules: that Michigan Ph.D. candidates should have studied also at some other major department (this was required for many years and always at least encouraged ); that no Michigan ethnology Ph.D. could be hired there; that a balanced representation of faculty from other major graduate schools be maintained in the Michigan department; that the department was to be run democratically (and "inefficiently," he would say) by an elected

Executive Committee; and at the lengthy regular faculty meetings anyone could propose any legislation and everyone had one vote, excepting the chairman who voted only to break a tie. All of these traits (including inefficiency, I am told) are still in effect at Michigan, and seem to be uniquely Michigan's. We all think White should be honored for this.

One of the most common complaints by former students now active in anthropology is that White never commented on their professional work sometimes appeared to have not even read it. It is probable that he didn't review their work because of his reaction against schools of thought.6 He was, nonetheless, a very warm and hospit- able friend to his former students.

An important element in White's career, in both its social and intellectual aspects, was how fully it was shared by his wonderful wife (who was not childless, she said: she had him). Mary White died in 1959, after five dreadful years of cancer operations and invalidism. In his loneliness, Leslie hastily made another marriage (to Helen Heatlie), a disaster which soon ended in divorce. He somehow still managed to work, however, immersed in the huge project on modern capitalism. In his last years in Santa Barbara, he was despondent about the chances of ever finishing it: he said he got into it the way the woolly mammoth got into the La Brea tar pits, little by little, then more and more, then hopelessly.

In spite of his unpopularity in many important quarters, White received numerous academic honors. He was given an honorary doctorate of sciences in 1952 by the University of Buffalo and honorary doctor of laws in 1970 by the University of Colorado. He was given the annual Award for Distinguished Service voted by the Faculty of the University of Michigan in 1957 (the first year the Award was made), and received the Viking Fund Medal of the Wenner-Gren Foundation in 1959. He was Vice-President of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in 1958, and President of the American Anthropolog- ical Association in 1964. He served as visiting professor at Yenching University (Peking), Yale, Harvard, University of Cali- fornia at Berkeley, Rice, San Francisco State, and University of California at Santa Barbara.

The most distinctive intellectual honor awarded to White, however, was not academic. This occurred in 1947, before the Age of Television, when he was chosen to represent the social sciences in a radio series called The Scien tists Speak . Each Sunday afternoon during the intermission in the

616 AMERICAN ANTEIROPOLOGIST 178,1976]

New York Philharmonic Society Concerts, broadcast from Carnegie Hall by NBC, a distinguished scientist lectured on the general intellectual significance of his specialty. White's brilliant talk, "Energy and the Development of Civilization, " was widely acclaimed and reprinted several times, even in Time Magazine (in digest). One may dispute the relative significance of this event, but the honor pleased him precisely because it was not by the academic profession (where awards seem to be given so often on the basis of personal politics).

Certainly he never courted the anthropological establishment, nor his university 's administrators, never deviated one step from his course in order to gain any kind of academic approval. The professional awards cited above, it may be noted, came late in his career-they were embarrassingly overdue compared to most other recipients of similar asvards-but at any rate, we may be sure the recognition was entirely by merit. It seems fitting to close on this note: that all former students agree that of all the important things he taught, the most memorable remains as a morality of total, utter honesty, unblemished by even a hint of academic careerism or any other kind of self-seeking. 7 And this was taught in the most effective way, by unwavering example rather than by precept.

ELMAN R. SERVICE University of California, Santa Barbara

NOTES

Acknowledgments. I am very indebted to the following friends and former students of Leslie White who helped me prepare this part of the Obituary: David F. Aberle, Robert and Alma Anderson, Angus and Wanda Babcock, Richard K. Beardsley, Robert Carneiro, Beth Dillingham, Gertrude E. Dolet Thomas G. Harding, Betty J. Meggers, Edward Norbeck, Helen Service, Albert C. Spaulding, and Raymond and Una Wilder.

l See Barnes (1960) for details on this epoch of White's career.

2 This simile is not contrived: White admired Henry L. Mencken, the famous debunker of politics and acidulous critic of American customs, and they corresponded. In 1938 Mencken, as Editor of The Ameri- can Mercury, published a satirical article called "Professors Have Soft Jobs. " Al- though it was signed "Professor Anony- mous," internal evidence clearly shows that the author could have been no one but White. (Shortly after it appeared I charged him with the authorship and, since he was unable to tell a lie, he was evasive-thus

telltale. ) But, ironically, his own job was tough, not soft, and he worked con- centratedly and steadily to the end of his career, not only on his various researches, but also, especially, on his teaching. He must have meant by the article that professors can have soft 30bs, if they want to play it that way, as so many do. But he couldn't have played any job that way: one of the most notable aspects of his character was this sternly responsible work ethic.

3 This book has now appeared as The Concept of Cultural Systems (1975b).

4 What a selling job !-it would seem. Students who have visited the pueblos and experienced the chill always ask how on earth you do this. White usually said that he couldn't recommend any formula. I think that he didn't know what to say, for the basic element was that he liked these informants and reciprocally, they liked him, and they became friends. Who can tell you how to be a friend to someone? Significant- ly, he did not lie to these Indians; he told them exactly what he was doing and why. They believed him, as well they might, for he was a totally honorable man. These informants remained close friends of White's over years long after he had stopped "fieldwork. "

5 See The Social Organization of Eth- nological Theory (1966a), for his criticism of schools of thought.

6But it is sometimes pointed out that he did in fact read and comment on the essays in Sahlins and Service, Evolutiorl and Cul- ture, by writing the "Foreword" (White 1960b). This seems to be the only instance of such extensive review, and the story tells something of his character Sahlins had suggested to the Editor of the Univetsity of Michigan Press that he urge White to do the "Foreword" by telling him that it was his duty The word worked its magic on him, but he later said that he regretted writing it because it gave the impression of collaboration and thus looked like a school-of- thought phenomenon again (to the many who might look at but not read the book)

7 Including "grantsmanship," for which he often expressed contempt. I cannot find a record of any grant for released time and salary-only a few for minor summer automobile travel ( for some of the New Mexico fieldwork) and one for typing and part-time student research assistancether research assistance and travel being paid out of his own relatively modest salary (although the oldest and by far the most eminent of the Michigan department's faculty, he was not the highest paid, having never "played an offer").

OBITUARIES 617

REFERENCES CITED

(For titles by White see Bibliography, below.)

Anonymous 19 38 Professors Have Soft Jobs. Ameri-

can Mercury 44:276-282. Barnes, Harry Elmer

1960 Foreword: My Personal Friendship for Leslie White. In Essays in the

Science of Culture in Honor of Leslie A. White. Gertrude E. Dole and Robert L. Carneiro, eds. New York: Crowell.

Bohannan, Paul, and Mark Glazer, eds. 1973 High Points in Anthropology. New

York: Alfred A. Knopf. Hatch, Elvin

19 7 3 Theories of Man and Culture . New York: Columbia University Press.

AN APPRAISAL OF LESLIE A. WHITE'S SCHOLARLY INFLUENCE

RICHARD K. BEARDSLEY Uniuersity of Michigan

Leslie A. White, a notable and highly distinctive figure in American anthropology of the mid-20th century, was also a person of unusual interest to the world outside his profession. He was a potent teacher during his 40 years at the University of Michigan-a role that carried over to his later teaching positions, after retirement, at Rice Univer- sity, San Francisco State College, and the University of California at Santa Barbara. What he taught in his undergraduate classes compelled attention not only of the students enrolled in them but also of faculty colleagues in various fields. On the Michigan campus for some years it compelled attention of another kind on the part of university administrators and the members of the offeampus community, for the responses evoked by his teaching included outrage and dismay as well as enthusiasm. His writings aroused American anthropological colleagues to similarly divergent and intense reactions, although what drew their fire usually was not what most upset the nonacademic local audience.

Elsewhere, both nationally and abroad, his work won strong, approving interest. His writings have been translated and published in various European and Latin American nations and in India, China, and Japan. As time has passed, the frequent reprinting of certain of White's writings in readers and collections of papers aimed at a wide range of students of human institutions and behavior testifies to the appreciation of his views. Approval is again evident in the many books and papers in our libraries, some old and others new, that acknowledge intellectual indebtedness or inspiration to him.

Most anthropologists know White best for his championing of the theory of cultural evolution, but it was often other aspects of his work that caught the interest of his audiences outside the field of professional anthropology. Our intent here is to examine

the variety and the depth of his influence. Perhaps this can best be done by inspecting the several different audiences that took interest in what he had to say.

Through most of White's teaching career, students from all parts of the Michigan campus consistently crowded large class- rooms to hear one or both of his main undergraduate courses: "The Mind of Primi- tive Man" and "The Evolution of Culture." In "The Mind of Primitive Man" he described the slow and reluctant progress of humanity toward recognizing culture as a s e l f - d e t ermined, self-contained process rooted in the human faculty for creating and manipulating symbols. This course dealt with culturology, the materialist, nonreduc- tionist approach to the study of culture expounded in the essays reprinted in The Science of Culture (1949a) [for references to White's works, see the Bibliography, below]. The contents of his course on evolution were extended and presented in his second major book, The Evolution of Cul- ture (1959a). Publication of this latter work led him to replace the course with one on "Ancient and Modern Civilization" that pur- sued from the beginnings of culture into the age of fossil fuels and atomic energy his thesis of the continuing evolution of culture by means of technological harnessing of ever greater quantities of energy per capita.

In his lectures and his best known books and essays, White's efforts to restore re- spectability to anthropological theory cover- ing the grand panorama of human affairs excited many students and a growing number of fellow scholars. By these same efforts, he succeeded in stepping on the toes of some people. In the decade of the 1930s, when White's career had just begun, some Ameri- can anthropologists concerned with the in- tertwining of psychological and cultural phenomena strongly opposed his uncom- promising assertion that culture can and

AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [ 78,1976 ] 618

often must be studied as a self-contained realm. True, his view of this matter did not strike most fellow professionals as being particularly heretical in comparison with his espousal of cultural evolution. But to a majority of students in his classes, White's culturology was new and electrifying; few of them remained unmoved one way or another as they heard him reason that civilization controls man rather than vice versa ("Man's Control over Civilization: An Anthropocen- tric Illusion " [ 1 948g ] ), or dismiss great men as no more personally effective in shaping the general or long run course of culture than a "sack of potatoes" ("Ikhnaton: The Great Man vs. the Cultural Process" [1948d] ). Among the varied people who found him convincing were students be- coming lawyers, businessmen, and house- wives. Years later, moved by word of his death, some wrote from various parts of the country to laud him as, "one of the greatest intellects and scientists of the twentieth century" (Ann Arbor News, Letters to the Editor, 25 May 1975 ).

In the emotional-intellectual currents of the 1930s, White's clearly articulated, un- compromising views created turbulence sharper than they were to evoke in the postwar era of the late 1 940s and early 1950s. We would do well here to recall that before the war the major American colleges and universities enrolled principally but in relatively small numbers the offspring of privileged segments of the society. The Michigan undergraduate student body, for example, grew from 3,800 in 1930 to less than 5,000 in 1940, as against today's 28,000. The faculty was correspondingly small. Thus, before World War II a single lecturer of White's intellectual caliber and personal charisma could have a proportionately great effect (with his proportionately large classes) when, expressing his views of c u 1 tural determinism, he passionately rejected free will and deism, as well as notions of biological or psychological determinism cherished by scholars in other fields. These views, in the 1930s and still later, brought trouble. White's evolutionism might be tolerated, even though it led him to question the permanence of a capitalist society; after all, the campuses of the 1930s sheltered a good many critics of capitalism. But his cultural determinism undercut still more deeply felt convictions of people outside the Eleld of professional anthropology. Irate parents and churchmen repeatedly pressed the administrators of the University of Michigan or appealed to state legislators to muzzle this iconoclast and were driven to greater wrath by his success in persuading students that his views were tenable.

It seems reasonable to believe that some part of the University of Michigan's generally strong support of academic free- dom in later decades may be traced to Leslie White and his lightning-rod capacity at that time to draw fire from the offcampus community. Higher administrators certainly learned from how many points of the compass they might expect to receive emotional attacks engendered by intellectual controversy. Retrospectively, it is difficult to judge whether despite prewar budgetary constraints anthropology staff might have grown under a less embattled leader. This discipline appeared to be touchy and until the 1950s a tacit understanding prevailed at Mighigan that it would be unwise to expose first year students to anthropology. How- ever, the department was still under White's chairmanship in the postwar years while growing rapidly from a nucleus of two (not counting a larger group primarily appointed in the Museum of Anthropology) to become one of the large departments in the nation. When White gave up the chairmanship in 1957 the department had 20 members, and it grew half again as large before his retirement in 1970. It deserves emphasizing that harmony with White's professional views was in no sense a qualification for appointment. As the department grew, it represented a broad spectrum of views and interests.

In the 1940s, White produced one paper after another that quickly attracted attention in fields outside anthropology, as well as within this discipline. On the whole, these writings flowed from his principal theoretical concerns, but each placed a particular problem in a novel perspective that readers could grasp and consider apart from or without knowledge of culturology or cultural evolution. This quality as much as the lucidity of his exposition undoubtedly helps account for the startling number of reprint- ings of these papers for publications in fields such as sociology, psychology, philosophy, linguistics, and mathematics as well as anthropology (see Service, above, who ap- propriately notes that the thrust of these papers is culturological). Given White's talent for hitting on and communicating key elements of the message about culture that are basic to the anthropological endeavor, it is understandable that on the Michigan campus scholars of many kinds had heard White's views with strong interest, not in- frequently attending his courses to do so. Now, as these papers appeared, they found an interested audience in the United States, and abroad. But White's readers were not limited to scholars in the academic world and their students. White 's personal papers contain correspondence with a good many

OBITUARIES 619

persons of other callings who initiated the exchanges in response to his published writings. Among these people were Leon Trotsky and Thomas Mann, the latter re- marking, in the course of his comment, on White's "elegant style of writing" (Michigan Historical Collections, Leslie White correspondence, 9 March 1939 and 12 Decem- ber 1948).

Leslie White's overall impact on the field of anthropology will undoubtedly continue to be discussed and rejudged for years to come. His latest principal work, The Con- cept of Cultural Systems (1975b), became available posthumously only in early 1976; even its initial reception is still unknown. Critical assessments of him as a general theorist began in the 1940s (see, e.g., Kroeber 1948; Steward 1955, 1960; Harris 1968; Bee 1974). In reviewing his professional career, however, it is necessary to note that his early work was of a different kind. Until the 1940s he was best known as a reliable and insightful field ethnographer specializing in the study of the Eastern Pueblo Indian communities. He reported on Acoma (1932a), San Felipe (1932b), Santo Domingo (1935a), and Santa Ana (1942a). White rounded out his studies of the Keresan Pueblos with the publication of his mono- graph on Sia (1962b). Rather than describing or reconstructing indigenous Indian cultures, these works broke new paths. Some years before American anthropological interest turned generally to the phenomena of culture change, these four monographs had dealt systematically with change induced in Pueblo Indian societies by their contact with the larger American society.

White 's later writings on a range of subjects of broad interest in anthropology show the fresh insights he was able to draw, from his theoretical views, on matters sus- ceptible to several contending interpretations. "A Problem in Kinship Terminology" (1939b) has been appraised as a major contribution to kinship theory. "The Defini- tion and Prohibition of Incest" (1948c) and "Evolutionary Stages, Progress, and the Evaluation of Cultures" (1947h) are innova- tive statements that continue to be pertinent in the study of the subjects they concern. Other notable papers of the 1940s took up subjects over which he became embattled with scholarly colleagues for many years: "History, Evolutionism, and Functionalism: Three Types of Interpretation of Culture" (1945d); "Diffusion vs. Evolution: An Anti- Evolutionist Fallacy" (1945b); "The Ex- pansion of the Scope of Science" (1947k); and the previously cited paper on Ikhnaton (1948d). These writings established him as

an articulate spokesman for cultural determinism and evolution. White also served the history of his discipline with his meticulous resuscitation of Lewis Henry Morgan and his scathing critiques of Franz Boas.

A recently recognized impact of Leslie White on anthropology is his influence on the development of the "new archaeology." According to Willey and Sabloff (1974:178-181):

In the mid 19 50s, when Willey and Phillips published their scheme for New World prehistory, cultural evolutionism was still largely proscribed in American anthropological circles. For a long time Leslie White had been its only protagon- ist. Steward, as we have seen, joined the issue in the late 1940s and 1950s.... Much more direct evolutionary statements than those of Willey-and Phillips were also made by a few other American archaeologists in the 1950s. Perhaps significantly, these were people who had been more influenced by White than by Steward.... At the close of the 1950s and into the 1960s a number of writings appeared on evolutionary theory or on applications of it to specific substantive problems. J. A. Ford, G. I. Quimby, and W. G. Haag-all former students of White's-were among the authors.... By the late 1960s a change had taken place in American archaeology. There had been a tacit acceptance of cultural evolution. Any representative sampling of recent American archaeological literature, with its strong reliance on the ideas of White and Steward and the younger cultural evolutionists among the social anthropologists, such as Sahlins, Service, and Fried, bears this out. In the last 20 years, shifting foci of

ethnological concern have moved much attention away from the concept of culture and from the conflict swirling around Leslie White that once embroiled most leaders of American anthropology. Perhaps victory and defeat are never clearly determined or acknowledged after such encounters. It is surely no exaggeration, however, to say that much of what Leslie White stood for or expostulated against in anthropological theory which drew fire as unbridled extremism at the height of his career now finds acceptance or further development as respectable doctrine; or even has been worn down to truism in anthropology and its sister sciences. No scholar today is regarded as rash for asserting that culture has a symboling basis; for asserting that human institutions persist and change for systemic reasons rooted in culture; or for formulating

AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST 620 [78,1976]

ideas or schemes that assert general evolutionary sequences of institutions. Even the many contemporary anthropologists to whom these subjects are not matters of central concern share at least an indirect heritage from Leslie A. White. Their interests and ideas are possible in part because he fought successfully to restore to respecta- bility a concern for grand theory.

Acknowledgments. Thanks are due to Beth Dillingham and Edward Norbeck for their contribution, in substance and form, to this portion of the obituary.

REFERENCES CITED

Bee, Robert L. 1974 Patterns and Processes: An Intro-

duction to Anthropological Strategies for the Study of Sociocultural Change. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.

Harris, Marvin 1968 The Rise of Anthropological

Theory. New York: Crowell. Kroeber, Alfred L.

1948 White's View of Culture. American Anthropologist 58: 151-159.

Steward, Julian E. 19 5 5 Theory of Culture Change.

Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 1960 Review of White's The Evolution

of Culture. American Anthropologist 62: 144-148.

Willey, Gordon R., and Jeremy A. Sabloff 1974 A History of American Arche-

ology. San Francisco: Freeman.

BIBLIOGRAPHY OF LESLIE ALVIN WHITE

Compiled by BETH DILLINGHAM University of Cincinnati

1921 Purchasing Power of the Dollar. Baton Rouge State Times.

1925a The Concept 'Social': A Critical Note. Social Forces 4:72-74.

1925b Personality and Culture. The Open Court 39: 145-149.

1925c Knowledge Interpreted as Language Behavior. The Open Court 39 :396-404.

1925d Review of The New History and the Social Studies, by Harry Elmer Barnes. Social Forces 4:432-434.

1925e Review of The History and Pros- pects of the Social Sciences. Harry Elmer Barnes, ed. Social Forces 4:643-646.

1925f Review of Instinct, A Study in Social Psychology, by L. L. Bernard. The New Republic 42:352.

1925g Review of Outlines of Introductory Sociology, by Clarence Marsh Case. American Review (Bloomington, Illinois) 3: 740-741.

1926a An Anthropological Approach to the Emotional Factors in Religion. Journal of Philosophy 23:546-554.

1926b Review of The History and Pros- pects of the Social Sciences. Harry Elmer Barnes, ed. American Review (Blooming- ton, Illinois ) 4 :452 -453.

1926c Review of My Crowded Solitude, by Jack McLaren. American Journal of Sociology 32:507.

19 27 a Ancient Indians and Modern Pueblos. Hobbies (Buffalo Society of Natural Sciences) 8:3-19.

1927b Review of Acoma, the Sky City, by Mrs. William T. Sedgwick. American Journal of Sociology 32 :671.

1927c Review of Crime and Custom in Savage Society, by Bronislaw Malinowski. American Journal of Sociology 32:1005.

1928a Medicine Societies of the Southwest. Abstracts of Theses, The University of Chicago, Humanistic Series 5:341-345.

1928b Summary Report of Field Work at Acoma. American Anthropologist 30 :559-568.

1928c Review of The Fall of Buffalo Horn, by Frank O. Robertson. Buffalo Evening News, 18 Feb. ("The News Magazine Section, " p. 13).

1928d Review of The Building of Cultures, by Roland B. Dixon. Buffalo Evening News, 28 April, p. 8.

1928e Review of My People the Sioux, by Chief Standing Bear. Buffalo Evening News, 5 May ("Saturday Magazine Sec- tion," p. 9).

1928f Review of The Stream of History, by Geoffrey Parsons. Buffalo Evening News, 30 June, p. 9.

1928g Review of Acoma, the Sky City, by Mrs. William T. Sedgwick. Journal of American Folklore 41:177-178.

1929a Keresan Indian Songs. Grosvenor Library Bulletin (Buffalo, New York) 3 :41-43.

1929b Review of Desert Drums, by Leo Crane. The Nation 128:138.

1930a A Comparative Study of Keresan Medicine Societies. Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of American- ists (New York, 1928) Pp. 604-619.

1930b The Sioux Indian and the Lapp Groups. Hobbies ( Buffalo Society of

OBITUARIES 621

by Francis Lambrecht. American Journal of Sociology 39:435.

1933c Review of Primitive Secret Societies, by Hutton Webster. American Journal of Sociology 39:290.

1933d Reuiew of Forgotten Frontiers, by A. B. Thomas. American Anthropologist 35 :533-535.

1934a Masks in the Southwest. American Anthropologist 36:626-628.

1934b Review of Our Primitive Con- temporaries, by George P. Murdock. American Journal of Sociology 40:266.

1934c Review of The Journal of Thomas Williams, Missionary in Fiji, 1840-1853, by G. C. Henderson. American Journal of Sociology 39 :723.

1935a The Pueblo of Santo Domingo, New Mexico. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Association, 43.

1935b Review of The Ape and the Child, by W. N. and L. A. Kellogg. American Anthropologist 37 :152-153.

1935c Reuiew of America in the South- west: A Regional Anthology. T. M. Pearce and Telfair Henden, eds. American Journal of Sociology 40:525.

1936 Review of The Medicine Man of the Amer-Indian and His Cultural Back- ground, by William T. Corlett. Mississippi Valley Historical review 22:578-580.

1937a (ed.) Extracts from the European Travel Journal of Lewis H. Morgan. Rochester Historical Society, Publications 16 :219-389.

1937b Some Suggestions for a Program in Anthropology in China. Chinese Social and Political Science Review 21 :120-134. Peiping.

1937c Review of Taos Pueblo, by Elsie Clews Parsons. Journal of American Folk- lore 50:198-200.

1937d Reuiew o f A Hundred Years of Anthropology, by T. K. Penniman. Amer- ican Anthropologist 39: 157-158.

1937e Review of Materials from the Archives of Lewis H. Morgan, by I. V i nnikov. American Anthropologist 39:158-159.

1938a Science Is Sciencing. Philosophy of Science 5:369-389.

1938b Review of Hopi Journal of Alex- ander M. Stephen. Elsie Clews Parsons, e d . A m e r i c a n Anthropologist 40: 306-307.

1938c Review of Thraldom in Ancient Iceland, by C. O. Williams. American Anthropologist 40:321.

1939a Mind is Minding. Scientific Monthly 48 :169-171.

1939b A Problem in Kinship Terminology. American Anthropologist 41:566-573.

1940a (ed.) Pioneers in American Anthro-

Natural Sciences) 10:289-293. 1930c Review of The Mind of the Savage,

by Raoul Allier. American Anthropolo- gist 32:663-665.

1930d Review of Tales of the North Ameri- can, by Stith Thompson. Buffalo Evening News.

1930e Review of Tribal Initiations and Secret Societies, by Edwin M. Loeb. Social Science Abstracts 2:1406.

1930f Review of Ritual Parallels in Pueblo and Plains Culture with a Special Refer- ence to the Pawnee, by Elsie Clews Parsons. Social Science Abstracts 2:1408.

1930g Review of Mentawei Religious Cult, by Edwin M. Loeb. Social Science Abstracts 2:1409-1410.

1931a Review of Growing Up in New Guinea, by Margaret Mead. Birth Control Review 15 :122.

1931b Review of The Making of Man: An Outline of Anthropology. V. F. Calver- ton, ed. Birth Control Review 15:261.

1931c Review of Lewis Henry Morgan, Social Evolutionist, by Bernard J. Stern. American Journal of Sociology 37:483.

1931d Review of Temperament in Native American Religion, by Barbara Aitken. Social Science Abstracts 3:1520.

1932a The Acoma Indians. 47th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Eth- nology, Pp . 17 -192.

1932b The Pueblo of San Felipe. Memoirs of the American Anthropological Associa- tion, 38.

1932c Evoliutsiia kul'tury i americanskaia shkola istoricheskoi etnologii (Cultural Evolution and the American School of Historical Ethnology). Sovetskaia Etnografia 3:54-86.

1932d The Mentality of Primates. The Scientific Monthly 34: 69-72.

1932e Reuiew of Kachalola, or Mighty Hunter, by Sidney S. Broomfield. Ameri- can Journal of Sociology 38:505.

1932f Review of Dancing Gods, by Erna Ferguson. American Journal of Sociology 37:842.

1932g Review of Up from the Ape, by Earnest A. Hooton. Birth Control Review 16: 54-55.

1932h Review of The Ruins at Kiatuth- lanna Eastern Arizona, by Frank H. H. Roberts, Jr. Social Science Abstracts 4:12.

1932i Review of An Analysis of the North- western Chihuahua Culture, by Henry A. Carey. Social Science Abstracts 4:661.

1933a Review of Myths and Ceremonies of the Mandan and Hidatsa, by Martha Warren Beckwith. American Journal of Sociology 39:435.

1933b Reuiew of The Mayawyaw Ritual,

622 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [78,1976 ]

pology, The Bandelier-Morgan Letters 1873-1883. 2 vols. Albuquerque: Univer- sity of New Mexico Press.

1940b Mind is Minding-But or Still? Scientific Monthly 50:365-368.

1940c The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. Philosophy of Science 7:451-463.

1940d Review of Pueblo Indian Land Grants of the "Rio Abajo," New Mexico, by Herbert O. Brayer. American Anthro- pologist 42 :141.

1940e Review of Music of Santo Domingo by Frances Densmore and The Pottery of Santo Domingo Pueblo, by Kenneth M. C hapman. American Anthropologist 42 :141-143.

1941a Nicotiana Rustica Cultivated by Pueblo Indians. Science 94:64-65.

1941b The Cultivation of Cotton by Pueblo Indians of New Mexico. Science 94 :162-163.

1941c Review of So Live the Works of Men. Donald D. Brand and Fred E. Harvey, eds. Hispanic American Historical Review 21:451-452.

1941d Review of Population Changes, by H. P. Mera. American Antiquity 6:368.

1942a The Pueblo of Santa Ana, New Mexico. Memoirs of the American An- thropological Association, 60.

1942b Further Data on the Cultivation of Tobacco among the Pueblo Indians. Science 96: 59-60.

1942c The Impersonation of Saints among the Pueblos. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 27(1941):559-564.

1942d Lewis H. Morgan's Journal of a Trip to Southwestern Colorado and New Mexico, June 21 to August 7, 1878. American Antiquity 8: 1-26.

1942e On the Use of Tools by Primates. Journal of Comparative Psychology 34: 369-374.

1943a Energy and the Evolution of Cul- ture. American Anthropologist 45 :335-356.

1943b Keresan Indian Color Terms. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, 28(1942):559-563.

1943c New Material from Acoma. Bureau of American Ethnology Bulletin 136(An- thropological Papers 32):301-359.

1943d Punche: Tobacco in New Mexico History. New Mexico Historical Review 18 :386-393.

1943e Sociology, Physics, and Mathe- matics. American Sociological Review 8: 373-379.

1943f The Unpublished Letters of Adolphe F. Bandelier, Concerning the Writing and Publication of "The Delight Makers. "

American Anthropologist 45:127-128. 1943g Review of Three New Mexico

Chronicles, by H. Bailey Carroll and J. Villasanna Haggard. American Anthro- pologist 45 :128-129.

1943h Reuiew of Levels of Integration in Biological and Social Systems. Robert Redfield, ed. American Anthropologist 45 :376-378.

1943i Review of Myths and Tales of the Chiricahua Apache Indians, by Morris E. Opler. Hispanic American Historical Review 23:357.

1943j Review of The Conflict between the California Indian and White Civilization, Parts I-IV, by S. F. Cook. Hispanic American Historical Review 23:744-745.

1943k Reuiew of Origin Myth of Acoma and Other Records, by Matthew W. Sterling. Journal of American Folklore 56: 306-307.

19431 Mind is Minding. ETC., A Review of General Semantics 1 :86-91.

1944a A Ceremonial Vocabulary among the Pueblo Indians. International Journal of American Linguistics 10 :161 -167.

1944b Morgan's Attitude toward Religion and Science. American Anthropologist 46 :218-230.

1944c 4'Rohona" in Pueblo Culture. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 29(1943):439-443.

1944d Review of Pueblo Indian Embroidery, by H. P. Mera. American Anthropologist 46:391-392.

1944e The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. ETC., A Review of General Semantics 1:229-237.

1945a Atomic Energy: An Anthropological Appraisal. Baltimore Sun, 29 Dec.

1945b Diffusion vs. Evolution: An Anti- Evolutionist Fallacy. American Anthro- pologist 47:339-356.

1945c Education, America's Magic. School and Society 61:353-354.

1945d History, Evolutionism, and Func- tionalism: Three Types of Interpretation of Culture. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 1:221-248.

1945e Notes on the Ethnobotany of the Keres. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 30(1944):557-568.

1945f Review o f La Esclavitud Pre- hispanica entre los Aztecas, by CarIos G. Garcia. Hispanic American Historical Re- view, 25:112-113.

1945g Review of The Hopi Way, by Laura Thompson and Alice Joseph. Scientific Monthly 60:473-474.

1946a Kroeber's Configurations of Culture G r o w t h . A m erican Anthropologist 48 :78-93.

OBITUARIES 623

1946b Lewis Henry Morgan. Union Worthies (Union College, Schenectady, New York) 1:5-9.

1946c The Origin and Nature of Speech. In Twentieth Century English. William S. Knickerbocker, ed. Pp. 93-103. New York: Philosophical Library.

1946d Reuiew of An Essay on Man, by Ernst Cassirer. American Anthropologist 48 :461-463.

1946e Atomic Energy: An Anthropological Appraisal. Milwaukee Journal,10 Jan.

1946f Atomic Energy: An Anthropological Appraisal. Norfolk Virginian-Pilot, 13 Jan.

1947a Culturological vs. Psychological In- terpretations of Human Behavior. A m e r ican Sociological Review 12: 686-698.

1947b Energy and the Development of Civilization. Publication of the U.S. Rubber Company. Pp. 1-3. New York.

1947c Energy and the Development of Civilization. In The Scientists Speak. Warren Weaver, ed. Pp. 302-305. New York: Boni and Gaer.

1947d Energy and the Development of Civilization. Technocracy Digest 107 :10-13.

1947e Energy and the Development of Civilization. Great Lakes Technocrat 4:5-7.

1947f Ethnographic Notes on Sandia Pueblo, New Mexico. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, 31(1945):215-222.

1947g Notes on the Ethnozoology of the Keresan Pueblo Indians. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, 31(1945): 223-243.

1947h Evolutionary Stages, Progress, and the Evaluation of Cultures. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 3:165-192.

1947i Evolutionism and Anti-Evolutionism in American Ethnological Theory. Cal- cutta Review 104:147-159; 105:29-40, 161-174.

1947j Evolutionism in Cultural Anthro- pology: A Rejoinder. American Anthro- pologist 49:400-413.

1947k The Expansion of the Scope of Science. Journal of the Washington Academy of Sciences 37 :181 -210.

19471 Lewis Henry Morgan: Pioneer in the Theory of Social Evolution. In An Intro- duction to the History of Sociology. Harry Elmer Barnes, ed. Pp. 138-154. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

1947m The Lewis Henry Morgan Collec- tion. University of Rochester Library Bulletin 2:48-52.

1947n The Locus of Mathematical Reality: An Anthropological Footnote. Philos-

ophy of Science 14:289-303. 1947O Review of Race and Democratic

Society, by Franz Boas. American Journal of Sociology 52 :371-373.

1947p Review of The Theory of Human Culture, by James Feibleman. American Sociological Review 12:235-236.

1948a On the Alleged Mysticism of Emile Durkheim. Central States Branch Bul- letin, American Anthropological Associa- tion 2:12-13.

19 48b Culturology. Bulletin of the Philadelphia Anthropological Society 1:2-5.

1948c The Definition and Prohibition of Incest. American Anthropologist 50 :416-435.

1948d Ikhnaton: The Great Man vs. the Culture Process. Journal of the American Oriental Society 68 :91 -114.

1948e Reply to William F. Edgerton. Journal of the American Oriental Society 68:193.

1948f The Individual and the Culture Process. Science 108:585-586.

1948g Man's Control over Civilization: An Anthropocentric Illusion. Scientific Monthly 66: 235-247.

1948h Miscellaneous Notes on the Keresan Pueblos. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters 32 (1946) 365-373.

1948i Reply to Bernhard J. Stern. Ameri- can Journal of Sociology 53:497-498.

1948j The Use and Manufacture of Tools by the Lower Primates. Antiquity 22 :210-211.

1948k Review of From Savagery to Civil- ization, by Grahame Clark, and History, by V. Gordon Childe. Antiquity 22:217-218.

19481 Evolucionismo e Anti-Evolucionismo na Teoria Etnologica Americana. Sociologia 10:1-39. Sao Paulo.

1949a The Science of Culture: A Study of Man and Civilization. New York. Farrar, Straus.

1949b Energy and the Development of Civilization. Michigan Technic 68(1) :13, 34.

1949c Ethnological Theory. In Philosophy for the Future: The Quest of Modern Materialism. R. W. Sellars, V. J. McGill and M. Farber, eds. Pp. 357-384. New York: Macmillan.

1949d The Individual and the Culture Process. Journal of the American College of Dentists 16:3-10.

1949e Man's Moment. Scientific Monthly 69:93.

1950a Man's Control over Civilization: An Anthropocentric Illusion. Calcutta Re- view 115:21-30, 81-95.

AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST 624 [78s1976 ]

1950b The Individual and the Culture Process. In Centennial. Pp. 74-81. Wash- ington: American Association for the Advancement of Science.

1950c Professor White Predicts Anthro- pology. Michigan Daily, 15 Jan., p. 2.

1950d Review of A Scientist on the Trail; Travel Letters of A. F. Bandelier, by G. P. Hammond and E. F. Goad. American Anthropologist 52:546.

1950e Review of Men, Machines and His- tory, by S. Lilley and Plough and Pasture by E. Cecil Curwen. American Anthro- pologist 52:547-548.

1950f Amerika Minzokugakusetsu ni okeru Shinka-shugi to han Shinka-shugi (Evolu- tionism and Anti-Evolutionism in Ameri- can Ethnological Theory ). Japanese Journal of Ethnology 15: 1-22.

1951a Lewis H. Morgan's Western Field Trips. American Anthropologist 53 :11-18.

1951 b Wilhelm Ostwald (1853-1932): A Note on the History of Culturology. Antiquity 25:31-32.

1951c Review of Evolutionary Thought in America. Stow Persons, ed. American Anthropologist 54:416-417.

1953a Problems of the Historical Ap- proach: Theory. In An Appraisal of Anthropology Today. Sol Tax, Loren C. Eiseley, Irving House, and Carl F. Voegelin, eds. Pp. 71-72. Chicago: Uni- versity of Chicago Press.

1953b The Power of Speech. In Progress of Mankind: Prehistoric to Present. Uni- versity of Michigan Telecourse Syllabus, Lesson 2, 4 pp.

1953c Energy and the Development of Civilization. In Progress of Mankind: Prehistoric to Present. University of Michigan Telecourse Syllabus, Lesson 3, 5 PP-

1953d Primitive Society. In Progress of Mankind: Prehistoric to Present. Univer- sity of Michigan Telecourse Syllabus, Lesson 10, 5 pp.

1954a The Energy Theory of Cultural Development. In Professor Ghurye Felicitation Volume. K. M. Kapadia, ed. Pp. 1-8. Bombay: Popular Book Depot.

1954b Review of Culture, a Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions, by A. L. Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn. Scientific Monthly 78: 122.

1954c Review of The Nature of Culture, by A. L. Kroeber, and Culture, a Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions, by A. L. Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn. American Anthropologist 56:461-468.

1954d The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Language, Mean- ing, and Maturity, S. I. Hayakawa, ed. Pp.

252-263. New York: Harper. 1955a The Symbol: The Origin and Basis

of Human Behavior. In Readings in Anthropology. E. Adamson Hoebel, Jesse D. Jennings, and Elmer R. Smith, eds. Pp. 303-312. New York: McGraw-Hill.

1955b On the Use of Tools by Primates. Man in Contemporary Society, prepared by the Contemporary Ci^rilization staff of Columbia University, Vol. 1. Pp. 58-64. New York: Columbia University Press.

195 6a Norman Daymond Humphrey, 1911-1955. American Anthropologist. 58 :548-550.

1956b The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Readings in Introductory Anthropology. Elman R. Service, ed. Pp. 36-45. Ann Arbor: Edwards.

1956c On the Use of Tools by Primates. In Readings in Introductory Anthropology. Elman R. Service, ed. Pp. 45-49. Ann Arbor: Edwards.

1956d Energy and the Evolution of Cul- ture. In Readings in Introductory Anthro- pology. Elman R. Service, ed. Pp. 50-65. Ann Arbor: Edwards.

1956e Culturological vs. Psychological In- terpretations of Human Behavior. In Readings in Introductory Anthropology. Elman R. Service, ed. Pp. 249-261. Ann Arbor: Edwards.

1956f The Locus of Mathematical Reality: An Anthropological Footnote. In The World of Mathematics. James R. New- man, ed. Vol. IV, Pp. 2348-2364. New York: Simon and Schuster.

1957a The Correspondence between Lewis Henry Morgan and Joseph Henry. Univer- sity of Rochester Library Bulletin 12: 17-22.

1957b Daniel Garrison Brinton. En- cyclopaedia Britannica 4:151.

1957c Evolution and Diffusion. Antiquity 31 :214-218.

1957d How Morgan Came to Write Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts, and Letters, 42(1956): 257-268.

1957e Review of The Missions of New Mexico,1776, [by ] Fray Francisco Atanasia Dominguez. E. B. Adams and A. Chaves, trans. American Anthropologist 59 :361-362.

1957f Review of Theory of Culture Change: The Methodology of Multilinear Evolution, by Julian H. Steward. Ameri- can Anthropologist 59: 540-542.

1957g The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Sociological Theory, a Book of Readings. Lewis A. Coser and Bernard Rosenberg, eds. Pp. 32-40. New York: Macmillan.

OBITUARIES 625

ington: Anthropological Society of Wash- ington.

1959j Man, Culture, and Human Beings. Michigan Alumnus Quarterly Review 66:1-6.

1959k (ed.) Lewis Henry Morgan: The Indian Journals 1859-62. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

19591 Summary Review. In The Evolution of Man's Capacity for Culture. J. N. Spuhler, arranger. Pp. 74-79. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

1959m Reuiew of Energy for Man: Wind- mills to Nuclear Power, by Hans Thirring, and The Atom and the Energy Revolu- tion, by Norman Lansdell. American Anthropologist 61: 513-515.

1960a Foreword. In Anthropology, by Edward Burnett Tylor (a reprinting). Pp. iii-v. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

1960b Foreword. In Evolution and Cul- ture. Marshall D. Sahlins and Elman R. Service, eds. Pp. v-xii. Ann Arbor: Uni- versity of Michigan Press.

1960c Four Stages in the Evolution of Minding. In Evolution after Darwin, Vol. II. The Evolution of Man. Sol Tax, ed. Pp. 239-53. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

1960d La Interpretation Morgan-Bandelier de la Sociedad Azteca. In Cor- respondencia de Adolfo F. Bandelier, by Leslie A. White and Ignacio Bernal. Pp. 10-83. Mexico City: Instituto Nacional de Anthropologia e Historica, Serie Historia IV.

1960e Review of Lewis H. Morgan: Ameri- can Scholar by Carl Resek. American Anthropologist 62:1073-74.

1960 f The World of the Keresan Pueblo Indians. In Culture in History, Essays in Honor of Paul Radin. Stanley Diamond, ed . Pp. 53-64. New York: Columbia University Press.

1960g The Concept of Culture. O Conceito de Cultura. Educasao e Cie^ncias Sociais 8:17-56. Rio de Janeiro, Brasil.

1960h Symbol, The Basis of Language and Culture. In Exploring the Ways of Man- kind. Walter Goldschmidt, ed. Pp. 70-77. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Wintston.

1 9 6 1 a Klemm, Gustav Friedrich (1802-1867). Encyclopaedia Britannica.

1961b McLennan, John Ferguson (1827-1881). Encyclopaedia Britannica.

1961c Morgan, Lewis Henry (1818-1881). Encyclopaedia Britannica.

1961 d Schmidt, Wilhelm (1868-1954). En- cyclopaedia Britannica.

1961e Review of George Catlin and the Old Frontier by Harold McCracken. Arizona and the West 3:98-99.

1957h The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Readings in the Ways of Mankind. Walter Goldschmidt, ed. Vol. I, Pp. 7-12. Boston: Beacon Press.

1958a Alexander Alexandrovich Golden- w e iser . D i ct ionary of American Biography, 22, Supplement 2, pp. 244-245.

1958b Comment on Ethnological Clues for the Sources of Rio Grande Pueblo Popu- lation, by Edward P. Dozier. In Migra- tions in New World Culture History. Raymond H. Thompson, ed. Pp. 29-30. University of Arizona Social Science Bulletin 27.

1958c Culturology. Science 128:1246. 1958d Legalized Incestuous Marriage. Man

58:116. 1958e What is a Classificatory Kinship

Term? Southwestern Journal of Anthro- pology 14: 378-385.

1958f The Science of Culture: A Study of Man and Civilization. New York: Grove Press.

1958g A Teoria da Energia no Desenvolvi- mento Cultural. Sociologia 20 :489-500. Sao Paulo.

1959a The Evolution of Culture: The Development of Civilization to the Fall of Rome. New York: McGraw-Hill.

1959b The Origin and Nature of Speech. In Readings in Anthropology. Morton H. Fried, ed. Vol. I, Pp. 154-162. New York: Crowell.

1959c The Expansion of the Scope of Science. In Readings in Anthropology. Morton H. Fried, ed. Vol. I, Pp. 15-24. New York: Crowell.

1959d Man's Control over Civilization: An Anthropocentric Illusion. In Readings in Anthropology. Morton H. Fried, ed. Vol. II, Pp. 548-566. New York: Crowell.

1959e The Energy Theory of Cultural Development. In Readings in Anthro- pology. Morton H. Fried, ed. Vol. II, Pp. 139-146. New York: Crowell.

1959f Culturology in Webster's Dictionary. Man 59:31.

1959g Changing Views: The Anthropolo- gist and Revolution. The Unitarian Register 138:9-11. (Excerpt from Paper, "Cultural Evolution" presented in a Symposium on Approaches to Religion at the annual meeting of the AAA, Chicago, 27 Dec. 1957.)

1959h The Concept of Culture. American Anthropologist 61: 227-51.

1959i The Concept of Evolution in Cul- tural Anthropology. In Evolution and Anthropology: A Centennial Appraisal. Betty J. Meggers, ed. Pp. 106-125. Wash-

626 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [78,1976]

1961f Lewis H. Morgan: American Scholar by Carl Resek. Science and Society 25 :71-74.

1961g El Concepto de la Evolution en la Antropologia Cultural. Revista de Ciencias Sociales 5:61-83 (Rios Piedras, Puerto Rico).

1961h The Origin and Nature of Speech. In The Craft of Writing. Derek Colville and J. D. Koerner, eds. New York: Harper.

1962a Lewis H. Morgan (1818-1881). Col- lier's Encyclopaedia.

1962b The Pueblo of Sia, New Mexico. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 184.

1962c Review of The Golden Age of Amer- ican Anthropology. Margaret Mead and Ruth L. Bunzel, eds. American Anthro- pologist 64:173-174.

1962d Symbolling: A Kind of Behavior. Journal of Psychology, 53:311-17.

1962e The Concept of Culture. Bobbs- Merrill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences.

1962f The Concept of Culture. In Culture and the Evolution of Man. M. F. Ashley Montagu, ed. Pp. 38-64. New York: Oxford University Press.

1962g Culturological vs. Psychological In terpretations of Human Behavior. Bobbs- Merrill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences.

1962h The Definition and Prohibition of Incest. Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences.

1962i Man's Control over Civilization: An Anthropocentric Illusion. In Language .and Ideas. Robert L. Montgomery, Jr., and William O. S. Sutherland, Jr., eds. Pp. 304-310. Boston: Little, Brown.

1962j On the Use of Tools by Primates. Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences.

1962k Energy and the Evolution of Cul- ture. Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences.

19621 Man's Control over Civilization. Bobbs-Merrill Reprint Series in the Social Sciences.

1962m The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. Bobbs-Merrill Re- print Series in the Social Sciences.

1963a Individuality and Individualism: A C ulturological Interpretation. Texas Quarterly 6:111-127.

1963b Individuality and Individualism: A C u l t u ro logical Interpretation. Inter- national Journal of Comparative Soci- ology 4:31-49. Dharwar, India.

1963c Review of The League of the Iroquois, by Lewis H. Morgan. William N. Fenton, ed. American Anthropologist 65 :443-444.

1963d The Ethnography and Ethnology of Franz Boas. Texas Memorial Museum, Bulletin 6. Austin: University of Texas.

1963e Keresan Pueblo Prayer Sticks. Papers of the Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters 48(2): 549-556.

1963f Der Begriff Kultur. In C. A. Schmitz, Kultur. Frankfort A. M. Akademische Reihe: Ethnologie.

1963g The Concept of Culture. In Current Perspectives in Social Psychology. E. P. Hollander and Raymond G. Hunt, eds. Pp. 106-112. New York: Oxford Uni- versity Press.

19 63 h The Culturological Revolution. Colorado Quarterly 11: 367-382.

1963i The Definition and Prohibition of Incest. In Patterns of Incest: A Psycho- Social Study of Incest based on Clinical and Historic Data. R. E. L. Masters, ed. Pp. 233-263. New York: Julian Press.

1964a Culturology. In A Dictionary of the Social Sciences. Julius Gould and William L. Kolb, eds. Pp. 174-175. Published under the auspices of UNESCO. New York: Free Press.

1964b Endogamy-Exogamy. In A Diction- ary of the Social Sciences. Julius Gould and William L. Kolb, eds. Pp. 239-240. Published under the auspices of UNESCO. New York: Free Press.

1964c Cultural Evolution. In A Dictionary of the Social Sciences. Julius Gould and William L. Kolb, eds. Pp. 157-158. Pub- lished under the auspices of UNESCO. New York: Free Press.

1964d Kinship Terminology. In A Diction- ary of the Social Sciences. Julius Gould and William L. Kolb, eds. Pp. 368-369. P u b l i shed under the auspices of UNESCO. New York: Free Press.

1964e The Evolution of Culture (Ch. 1, Man and Culture, The Evolution of Cul- ture). In Cultural and Social Anthro- pology: Selected Readings. Peter B. Ham- mond, ed. Pp. 406-426. New York: Mac- millan.

1964f Tools, Techniques and Energy (Ch. 2, Energy and Tools, The Evolution of Culture). In Cultural and Social Anthro- pology: Selected Readings. Peter B. Ham- mond, ed. Pp. 26-43. New York: Mac- millan.

1964g Lewis H. Morgan, Ancient Society (1877). New edition edited and an- notated for the John Harvard Library. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

1964h The Concept of Culture. In Con- temporary Sociology: An Introductory Textbook of Readings. Milton A. Barron, ed. Pp. 70-92. New York: Dodd, Mead.

1964i The World of the Keresan Pueblo fndians. In Primitive View of the World.

OBITUARIES 627

Stanley Diamond, ed. Pp. 83-94. New York: Columbia University Press.

1964j The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Language, Form, and Idea. T. Benson Strandness, Herbert Hackett, and Harry H. Crosby, eds. Pp. 137 -145. New York: McGraw-Hill .

1964k Science Is Sciencing. In Prose Models, An Inductive Approach to Writ- ing. Gerald Levin, ed. Pp. 74-76. New York: Harcourt, Brace.

1965a Anthropology 1964: Retrospect and Prospect. [Presidential address, AAA ] . American Anthropologist 67:629-637.

1965b Review of Technology and Eco- nomic Development, A Scientific Ameri- can Book. Economic Development and Cultural Change 13:479-482.

1965c Individuality and Individualism: A Culturological Interpretation. In In- nocence and Power. Gordon Mills, ed. Pp. 3-35. Austin: University of Texas Press.

1966a The Social Organization of Eth- n o l o gi cal Theory. Rice University Studies, Vol. 52, No. 4. Houston: Rice University.

1966b DefinitionsandConceptionsofCul- ture. In Concepts, Theory and Explana- tion in the Behavioral Sciences. Gordon J. DiRenzo, ed. Pp. 98-110. New York: Random House.

1966c La Ciencia de la Cultura. Spanish translation of Science of Culture. Buenos Aires.

1966d Anthropology 1964: Retrospect and Prospect. Sociological Abstracts 14 :4B 9963. '

1966e The Concept of Culture. In A Soci- ological Framework for Patient Care. Jeannette R. Folta and Edith S. Deck eds. Pp. 16-22. New York: Wiley.

1966f O Conceito de Cultura. Arquivos do Instituto de Antropologia, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Brasil, 2(1-2)39-71.

1966g Lewis H. Morgan. Collier's En- cyclopedia.

1966h Energy and the Evolution of Cul- ture. In Readings on Modern Sociology. Alex Inkeles, ed. Pp. 41-51. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

1966i The Symbol. In A Study of Early Man. Anthropology Curriculum Study Project.

1967a The Symbol. In A Study of Early Man. (2nd version). Anthropology Cur- riculum Study Project.

1967b The Symbol. In Literary Reflec- tions. Wm. R. Elkins, Jack L. Kendall, John R. Willingham, eds. Pp. 484-496. New York: McGraw-Hill.

19 67 c Review of The Southwestern Journals of Adolph F. Bandelier,

1880-1882. Charles H. Lange and Carroll L. Riley, eds. American Anthropologist 69:788.

1968a Lewis Henry Morgan. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.

1968b Adolph F. Bandelier. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences.

1 9 6 8 c Culturology. International En- cyclopedia of the Social Sciences.

1968d Harry Elmer Barnes as a Con- temporary Encyclopedist. In Harry Elmer Barnes, Learned Crusader. Arthur God- dard, ed. Pp. 41-63. Colorado Springs: Ralph Myles.

1968e Review of The Evolution of Society, Selections from Herbert Spencer's Prin- ciples of Society, edited and with an introduction by Robert L. Carneiro. American Anthropologist 70 :1187-1188.

1968f Nations as Sociocultural Systems. Ingenor. Aut., 1968. Pp. 4-7, 14-18.

1968g The Concept of Culture. In Readings in the Socio-Cultural Foundations of Education, John H. Chilcott, ed. Pp. 39-61. Belmont, California: Wadsworth.

1968h Culture: A Critical Review of Con- cepts and Definitions by A. L. Kroeber and Clyde Kluckhohn. In Theory in Anthropology: A Source Book. Robert A. Manners and David Kaplan, eds. Pp. 15-20. Chicago: Aldine.

1968i Four Stages in the Evolution of Minding. In A Workbook and Reader in Sociology. Leon F. Bouvier, ed. Berkeley: McCutchan.

1968j Energy and Evolution. In A Work- book and Reader in Sociology. Leon F. Bouvier, ed. Berkeley: McCutchan.

1968k Expansion of the Scope of Science. In Readings in Anthropology. Second ed., Vol. I. Morton H. Fried, ed. Pp. 15-24. New York: Crowell.

19681 The Origin and Nature of Speech. In Readings in Anthropology. Second ed., Vol. 1. Morton H. Fried, ed. Pp. 314-322. New York: Crowell.

1968m Man's Control over Civilization: An Anthropocentric Illusion. In Readings in Anthropology. Second ed., Vol. I. Morton H. Fried, ed. Pp. 43-61. New York: Crowell.

1969a Introduction to second edition of The Science of Culture. New York: Far- rar, Straus and Giroux.

1969b Italian translation of The Science of Culture. Firenze.

1969c The Concept of Culture. In Psycho- linguistics, an Introduction to the Study of Speech and Personality. Norman A. Markel, ed. Pp. 59-67. Homewood, Illinois: Dorsey Press.

1970a Serbo-Croatian translation of The Science of Culture (with introduction:

628 AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST [78,1976]

Kulturologija 1 Marksizam). Belgrade, Yugoslavia.

1970 b Daniel Garrison Brinton. En- cyclopedia Americana.

1970c The Concept of Culture. In The Meaning of Culture. Morris Freilich, ed. Pp. 97-123. Lexington, Kentucky: Ginn.

1970d The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Man's Cpltural Dimension. Grifford S. Nickerson, ed. Pp. 29-41. New York: MSS Educational Pub- lishing.

1971a The Definition and Prohibition of Incest. In Readings in Kinship and Social Structure. Nelson Graburn, ed. Pp. 325-337. New York: Harper and Row.

1971b The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In The Sociological Perspective. Scott G. McNall, ed. Pp. 92-101. Boston: Little, Brown.

1971 c The Concept of Culture. In The Meaning of Culture. Morris Freilich, ed. Lexington, Massachusetts: Xerox College Publishing.

1972a The Concept of Culture. In Culture and School. Ronald Shinn, ed. Pp. 3-28. Scranton: Intext Education Publishers.

1972b Science Is Sciencing. In Make Men of Them: Introductory Readings for Cul- tural Anthropology. Charles C. Hughes, ed. Pp. 27-36. Chicago: Rand McNally.

1972c The Symbol. In Make Men of Them: Introductory Readings for Cultural An- thropology. Charles C. Hughes, ed. Pp. 27-36. Chicago: Rand McNally.

1972d The Definition and Prohibition of Incest. In Sex and Society. John N. Edwards, ed. Pp. 160-171. Chicago: Markham.

1973a The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Sociological Per- spectives. Paul E. Mott et al., eds. Pp. 116-124. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill.

1973b The Concept of Culture (with Beth Dillingham). Minneapolis: Burgess.

1973c The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Kaleidoscope. Jon M. Shepard, ed. Pp. 62-67. New York: Harper and Row.

1973 d Human Behavior: Culturological and Psychological Interpretations. In Kalei- doscope. Jon M. Shepard, ed Pp. 87-92. New York: Harper and Row.

1973e The Acoma Indians. 47th Annual Report of the Bureau of American Eth- nology, with a Foreword by the author. Glorieta, New Mexico: Rio Grande Press.

1973f The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In Humanifestations: Readings in Cultural Anthropology. Jonathan E. Reyman et al., eds. Cham- paign: Published for Illinois State Univer-

sity by Stipes Publishing Co. 1973g The Anthropologist and the Ameri-

can Indian. Newsletter of the American Anthropological Association 14(6):2.

1973h Elsie Worthington Clews Parsons. In Dictionary of American Biography, Sup- plement 3, 1941-1945. Pp. 581-582.

1973i Man's Control over Civilization: An Anthropocentric Illusion. In The Shadow Within. Richard L. Cherry, Robert J. Conley, and Bernard A. Hirsch, eds. Pp. 84-102. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

1973j Journal of a Trip to the Orient. Houston: Tourmaline Press.

1973k Energy and the Evolution of Cul- ture. In High Points in Anthropology. Paul J. Bohannan and Mark Glazer, eds. pp. 336-355. New York: Knopf.

1 974 a Human Culture. Encyclopaedia Britannica, 15th edition. Vol. 8, pp. 1151-1159.

1974b Reply [to Sidney M. Wilhelm ] . Cur- rent Anthropology 15:466-467.

1974c The Symbol: The Origin and Basis of Human Behavior. In The Diversity of Religious Expression, Religion in Human Culture. Part 1, Pp. 24-26.

1974d Man and Culture. In Theories and Paradigms in Contemporary Society. R. Serge Denisoff, Orel Callahan, and Mark H. Levine, eds. Pp. 220-235. Itasca, Illinois: Peacock.

1975a The Agricultural Revolution (Pp. 283-289 of The Evolution of Culture). In A Reader in Culture Change, Vol. I. Ivan Brady and Barry Isaac, eds. Pp. 101-107. New York: Schenkman.

1975b The Concept of Cultural Systems: A Key to Understanding Tribes and Na- tions. New York: Columbia University Press.

1975c Man's Control over Civilization: An Anthropocentric Illusion. In Reader in Culture Change. Vol. I. Ivan Brady and Barry Isaac, eds. Pp. 23-45. New York: Schenkman.

1975d Some Remarks by L. White on Two Contributions by G. Weiss. American Anthropologist 77: 78-80.

1976a The Concept of Culture. In Ideas of Culture: Sources and Uses. Frederick C. Gamst and Edward Norbeck, eds. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Xlnston (in press).

1976b Energy and the Evolution of Cul- ture. In Ideas of Culture: Sources and Uses. Frederick C. Gamst and Edward Norbeck, eds. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston (in press).

1976c History, Evolution and Functional- ism: Three Types of Interpretation of Culture. In Ideas of Culture: Sources and Uses. Frederick C. Gamst and Edward Norbeck, eds. New York: Holt, Rinehart

OBITUARIES 629

and Winston (in press). 1976d Symboling: A Kind of Behavior. In

Ideas of Culture: Sources and Uses.

Frederick C. Gamst and Edward Norbeck, eds. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston (in press).