Rethinking the Concept "Primitive"

Author: Francis L. K. Hsu

Overview:

• Published in Current Anthropology, Volume 5, Issue 3, June 1964.
• Part of a series honoring Melville J. Herskovits.
• The paper challenges the use of the term "primitive" in anthropology.

Background:

• "Primitive" is a term historically used by anthropologists to describe societies that are perceived as simple or undeveloped.
• Defined by Webster as relating to early times, characterized by simplicity or old-fashionedness.
• E. B. Tylor's stages of cultural evolution: savage, barbaric, civilized.
• Historically, "primitive" has connotations of inferiority.

Criticism of the Term "Primitive":

1. Inferiority Connotation:

   • Many scholars have struggled with the term's negative implications.
   • Alternatives suggested include "non-literate" (Herskovits) or new dichotomies like Sapir's "Genuine vs. Spurious cultures."

2. Inconsistent Usage:

   • Survey of 30 anthropology books shows wide, inconsistent usage of "primitive."
   • Meanings range from "non-literate" to "simple" or "non-industrialized." Many are slapdash and conflicting.

3. Lack of Precision:

   • The term offers no significant analytic advantage.
   • It doesn't contribute to theory-building or scientific insight.

Alternatives and Suggestions:

• Non-Literate:

  • Suggested by Herskovits as a neutral term.
  • However, as societies develop written languages, this term will also become obsolete.

• More Precise Classifications:

  • Move beyond simple dichotomies like "primitive" vs. "civilized."
  • Use classification based on economic practices, state organization, kinship, etc.

Practical Concerns:

• Global Sensitivity:
  • As formerly "primitive" societies gain political power, using such terms can be seen as derogatory.
  • The term "primitive" is seen as politically and psychologically unfavorable.

Conclusion:

• The term "primitive" is outdated and no longer scientifically valid for contemporary cultures.
• Anthropologists should abandon the term in favor of more precise and meaningful classifications.

References Cited:

• The paper cites a wide range of anthropological scholarship, including works by Herskovits, Diamond, Kroeber, and others.