Tylor / by R.R. Marett.

  • Robert Ranulph Marett
Date:
1936
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Tylor / by R.R. Marett. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    43/230 page 37
    weakest link.”1 His inference is that the use of stone or at best bronze implements implies a derivation from “some very barbarous and ignorant tribe.” Now, quite apart from the consideration that such a descrip¬ tion hardly does justice to the facts, had he then been as familiar with them as he was afterwards to become —for to sum up Ancient Egyptians of the earlier dynasties or even Polynesians as ignorant barbarians would be an insult to history—the principle itself, will not bear a moment’s scrutiny. As well argue that a man’s worst vice affords a measure of his virtues. At any rate no causal explanation is forthcoming why stone or bronze tools cannot coexist with Christian morals, whereas iron ones can. Some kind of differen¬ tial development as between the various powers of Man must be allowed as at least a theoretical possi¬ bility. The truth is, however, that Tylor here is not deliberately making towards some doctrine of eco¬ nomic materialism that would assess culture in terms of the industrial factor; but in the usual manner of the tiro has simply resorted to rash generalization in the interests of special pleading. For the time being he contents himself with the following conclusion: “On the whole, the most probable view of the origin of the Mexican tribes seems to be the one ordinarily held, that they really came from the Old World, bringing with them several legends, evidently the same as the histories recorded in the book of Genesis. This must have been, however, at a time when they were quite a barbarous, nomadic tribe; and we must regard their civilization as of independent and far later growth.”2 Nay, not only does he pin his faith on Biblical parallels, 1 Ibid. 102-3. 8 Ibid. 104.
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3