Reprinted with permission Contents Frontispiece Preface Introduction: Continuities Across Scientific Revolutions I. W h e n in doubt, I present multiple sources shedding light on the same events and personalities. Pilling's apologetic reply 13 June 1885: B A E m a d e it clear that the Bureau's ongoing research would not be available to Brinton; despite having m a d e contributions to Pilling's bibliographies, he w a s considered a competitor rather than a collaborator: I regret to have to say that the linguistic classification is still unfinished — indeed in so unsatisfactory a condition that it would scarcely be intelligible to those not engaged in its compilation. Because the emphasis is on institutional frameworks and interactions of scholars around research problems, coherence requires finishing one story before beginning another. Meetings drew audiences of up to 300 M c G e e to Putnam, 2 Feb. Powell placed each in a separate linguistic family. The advent of Franz Boas on the North American scene irrevocably redirected the course of Americanist anthropology.
M y subsequent dissertation work broadened the scope to professionalization more generally and, inevitably, to assessing the role of Franz Boas in 20th-century American anthropology Darnell 1969, 1971c. Race, language and culture were analytically separate variables which might coincide because of particular historical circumstances but need not do so. For some, the Powell classification was sufficient for ethnographic purposes. In correspondence as well as in published work, they debated, disagreed, tested ideas against one another. B y 1894, when Powell began receiving a salary as Director, matters were so desperate that all salaries were scaled d o w n 15% and some staff were on indefinite leave without pay Powell to Langley, 3 Dec. Although Powell emphasized American Indian culture, Congress imposed archaeology on the Bureau's scope in 1881.
Extensions of the Bureau's scope during the 19th century were modest. Brinton accepted superficial similarities more easily w h e n the classification m a d e geographic sense; he, like Powell, saw linguistic classification as a means to organize the ethnographic diversity of North America. The classification is thus essentially practical. The other linguist of the early Bureau staff was J. The major instance in which Powell and Brinton m a d e different decisions, however, was in evaluation of the evidence for Uto-Aztecan. The early years of the Bureau, however, coincided with the height of Powell's political Constraints of Government Anthropology 35 power. Powell frequently interceded to obtain permission for such individuals to remain longer in Washington as informants Powell to Schurz, 23 Jan.
The papers range from the history of anthropology and linguistics to present innovations within this tradition. T h e Bureau had little part in the linguistic fieldwork, mostly in California and on the Northwest coast, which revised the 1891 classification over thefirsttwo decades of the 20th century. In any case, the reputation of the Bureau in the late 19th century rested on the scope and implementation of these cooperative ' m a p ping' projects. F r o m the hindsight of a contemporary inheritor of the Boasian tradition, and to establish the continuity of m y o w n work, I wish to return in this volume to the roots, the origins, as it were, of the Americanist anthropology I practice. His Geological and Geographical Survey of the Rocky Mountain Region was the fourth and last of the major surveys and can be understood only in relation to the others Dupree 1957:196-213; Stegner 1954. They had been submitted to James H a m m o n d Trumbull 1821-1897 , an independent scholar from Hartford, Connecticut, to organize for publication. Commentaries, depending on the author's point of view, have ranged between extremes of eulogy and depreciation.
Kroeber 1961, 1970; Steward 1973, T h o m p s o n 1968. Powell's summary to Baird, 2 April 1880: B A E of researches up to that time catalogues a curious hodge-podge of subjects — some subdisciplines of anthropology, others topics incidentally of interest to the original staff. Progress toward mutual intelligibility could only reflect degeneration in the level of social organization Powell to Taylor, 23 Feb. Oral histories of American anthropology have generally assumed that the transition w e are discussing was fairly sudden, that professional anthropology in America sprang forth full-blown about 1900 w h e n Boas began teaching at Columbia. These m e n m a d e ethnology their career, at least for a time. Bushnell 1875-1941 revised it through circulars as late as 1911 33rd A R for 1911-12, 1919, p.
Nonetheless, in retrospect, professionalization was more than a by-product of the work that they, collectively and individually, did. The alphabet, originally devised by William Dwight Whitney 18271894 of Yale, caused considerable consternation in the Bureau. Powell's was a program of urgent anthropological research. However, there are works which seek to interpret him: He was also an influence on Steinthal and Lazarus. In 1909, the requirements for Bureau staff positions had changed so m u c h that the Secretary of the Smithsonian decided Hewitt should be paid for manuscripts rather than by salary as native 'informants' were often paid. Scientific geology had to turn to these practical political issues.
The two cases in which Powell separated previous families both resulted from the 1888 fieldwork of Henshaw in California. Hewitt was warned by M c G e e 25 July 1909: B A E that he should stress his contributions to the cooperative projects of the Bureau rather than his unfinished linguistic researches. Disciplinary content centred around the critique of evolutionary theory and methodology for collection of basic ethnographic information about the American Indian. T h e emphasis shared by Powell and Boas will be foregrounded in this interpretation because it is the core of the continuity across paradigm transition which is the problematic of m y argument. There is not very m u c h in the paper which seems to be wrong but there is a theory at the bottom of it which will lead you astray and put you in antagonism with many good workers and able m e n in America. Participants in this dialogue accepted the challenge of making their underlying theoretical assumptions explicit. John Bartlett 1820-1905 wrote to Powell 25 A u g.
This style of fieldwork was apparently acceptable to his colleagues in the Bureau and the Smithsonian. Powell even granted the theoretical possibility that classifications based on language, religion, mortuary customs, sociology and physical characteristics might remain separate and irreconcilable. This seemed to contradict an oral history in which Boas took North American anthropology by storm, importing graduate education on the G e r m a n model and mounting an instantly devastating critique of cultural evolution. Mallery's focus on picture and sign language was supplemented by questionnaires and examples from the rest of the Bureau staff. H e also decided where additional fieldwork was needed. Boas certainly had his fair share of academic estrangements and betrayals, and was clearly victimized by a unique kind of museum factionalism. .
Since 1969, the place of history of anthropology within the discipline has changed substantially. Powell 1878 m o v e d from geology to ethnology w h e n he argued that land in the arid regions of the American Southwest could not be divided by principles independent of water resources on particular parcels of land. Survey fieldwork by H e n s h a w , Curtin, Dorsey, Hewitt, Gatschet and others w a s expected to produce just enough information to specify linguistic affiliation. Although not all of these were carried out during Powell's lifetime, all are consistent with his view of the 46 Chapter 4 Bureau's mandate to acquire, compile and present to the public information on the Indian population of the United States. Contributors did not themselves have to be professional scientists. Ray 1956: 167 Franz Boas, also, helped to establish anthropology in American universities and did m u c h to stimulate field research.