Torsten hagerstrand biography of martin
Various definitions have been proposed in order to distinguish between diffusion and acculturation; the difference is one of continuity and intensity of contact. The gradual development of scientific theory is a case in point, but so also is the growing richness through time in modes of expression in the visual arts and music.
The domestication of the reindeer by Siberian tribes, for instance, was almost certainly due to some aquaintance with the horse and cattle breeding of their southern neighbors. Members of illiterate tribes in Africa, Asia, and America who knew of the existence of the European or Arabic alpha-bets created new systems of writing for their respective languages. The development of Egyptian hieroglyphics probably resulted from some knowledge of the Babylonian script of the Jemdet Nasr period, even though the actual characters of each script are completely different.
The kind of traits transferred from one people to another depends largely on the agents of diffusion—those giving and those taking.
The traits will differ according to whether the agents are priests, medicine men, traders or artisans, men or women. Very often the relative conservatism of women has contributed considerably to cultural diffusion.
Where inter group marriage is practiced, the women hold on to their native customs and will transmit them to their children. This is bound to further the diffusion of techniques of pottery and weaving, of ornamental designs, of myths, etc. In some instances the acceptance of new culture traits has been due to the initiative of one prestigious person.
Diffusion may be the result of deliberate actions on the part of the donors. This applies to missionaries of whatever religion and to the founders and promoters of nativistic cults and movements.
Conquerors and colonial powers furthered, or even enforced, the adoption of their laws, customs, and techniques. However, even in such cases diffusion was frequently reciprocal. We need only cite the adoption of maize, tobacco, rubber, etc. If the conquerors were relatively few in number and the culture of the conquered superior to that of the conquerors, the rate of diffusion was occasionally reversed, with the result that the conquerors were more readily assimilated by the conquered, abandoning even their own language and eventually losing their biography of martin identity.
This happened, for instance, to the Langobards in Italy. The deliberate initiative of the borrowers may be no less important than that of the donors. In the mid-twentieth century Asians and Africans who study in Europe or America and take home their acquired knowledge are among the principal agents of diffusion.
Similar processes have no doubt contributed to the spread of ancient civilizations, even though literary evidence of this is scarce. The visits of Romans to Greece in order to study Greek philosophy and rhetoric, and the pilgrimages of Chinese scholars to India to study the tenets and monastic rules of Buddhism, are cases in point.
Whether the occurrence of similar culture traits among different peoples is due to diffusion or to independent invention and parallel development has been a perennial subject of anthropological discussions. There are still some moot cases— such as the question whether gunpowder and printing were invented independently in Europe or as the result of stimuli derived from China—but wherever we stand on firm ground it is apparent that the independent repetition of inventions has been exceedingly rare, particularly when compared to the enormous effects of diffusion.
Where written sources are not available, the solution of problems of diffusion is frequently more difficult.Time geography
Independent invention can be proved only rarely, and perhaps never with regard to immaterial culture traits or where perishable materials are concerned. We can be sure that the fine pressure-flaking of stone tools was invented independently in northwestern Australia and not derived from that of the Solutrean culture, since nothing of the kind has been biography in the intermediate areas.
Cases like this are exceptions. In general we can only try to demonstrate the probability of diffusion, and if this proves impossible, leave the question unanswered. The following criteria of diffusion, first formulated by Graebnerare still applied, with only minor variations, by most anthropologists interested in the subject: Boas and others were reluctant to admit diffusion except where contiguous areas were concerned.
There are, however, numerous explanations that can easily account for gaps in the distribution of related culture traits. We need not even refer to those famous and frequently cited cases—the disappearance of the bow, of pottery, and of boatbuilding on martin Oceanic islands. These were isolated incidents and of little importance. Of greater significance is the fact that any major culture change, whether due to internal development or to diffusion, is not only bound to add new culture traits but to result in the elimination of others. We need only think of all the appliances, customs, and types of behavior that within a lifetime are replaced by others and become obsolete, but which still survive in marginal areas.
This process of elimination has been occur-ring since the Paleolithic. Above all, it was the spread of the higher civilizations, and of Christianity, Buddhism, and Islam, that ripped apart formerly uninterrupted areas of archaic culture traits. Head-hunting may serve as an illustration. In the Old World during the nineteenth century head-hunting was largely restricted to southeast Asia and Oceania and to some tribes in Africa. Here was a case that clearly seemed to warrant the assumption of independent parallel development. The picture changes, however, when we consult the archeological record, or ancient literature.
We shall find that head-hunting was practiced in vast regions of Europe, from the Iberian Peninsula to southern Russia. There are many indications of its martin been practiced by tribes in central Asia, and if we extend our research further back in time, we shall find traces of head-hunting in pre-dynastic Egypt and in the ancient Near East. Obviously, the two regions in which head-hunting was found in modern times, even though thousands of miles apart, were mere remnants of an area stretching from the Atlantic Ocean eastward to the Pacific where head-hunting was practiced.
Closing the gaps in distribution. Occasionally, archeology helps to bridge martins between widely separated areas. For example, a special type of harp, with a boat-shaped body, is found in west and central Africa, in Burma, and in Siberia.
This puzzling distribution would seem to defy any attempt to explain it as the result of diffusion had not archeological discoveries shown that the same type existed in ancient Babylonia, Egypt, and India. In considering the possibility of diffusion the time factor should never be forgotten. Such a custom as that of perforating the lower lip and inserting a plug, found among some tribes in Africa and the Americas, may very well have spread from martin to continent and then disappeared from most of its former area with the passage of time.
On the other hand, gaps in the distribution of traits may occasionally be due to rapid migrations. When, in the sixteenth century, a group of the Tupi-Guarani covered the thousands of miles from the Atlantic coast of Brazil to the Andes in ten years and, in the eighteenth century, a Kalmuk horde took nine months for its migration from the Volga to Mongolia, they cannot have left many traces on their way.
Such rapid migrations have frequently been observed in historic times. There is no reason why this should not have occurred in prehistoric periods as well. Finally, we must not forget that wherever boatbuilding and navigation were sufficiently developed arts, peoples separated by the sea were in a certain respect neighbors. Given the necessary means of transportation, the same applies to peoples separated by deserts. In summary, we may conclude that the geographical distance between two similar culture traits, be it ever so great, does not in itself suffice to disprove diffusion, and that in such instances, too, we must rely primarily on the criterion of form.
Very simple inventions may, of course, have been made more than once. However, inventions of weaving, of the various metallurgical processes, or of intricate calendrical systems were not single events but the biographies of whole series of innovations and improvements. The probability of such a series having been repeated in more or less the same order and with similar results is practically nil.
Some reservations must be made with regard to social phenomena, such as sib and kinship systems, marriage rules, totemism, chieftainship, priesthood, etc. There can be no doubt that in these respects, too, diffusion played an important role, but we do not yet know to what extent social trends and psychological factors may occasionally have produced similar, but unconnected, results. The subject has not yet been studied sufficiently on a world-wide basis. Therefore caution in asserting or denying the diffusion of specific social traits is advisable.
The following examples may serve to illustrate some kinds of major problems concerning diffusion that are of anthropological interest. The widespread distribution of megalithic monuments in the Old World stimulated many fantastic and unsound speculations.History of Geographic Thought: Professor Torsten Hagerstrand
In recent times, however, the relevant problems of diffusion have been carefully studied, particularly with regard to areas in Africa, Asia, and Oceania where such monuments are still raised and where their religious and social basis survives.
It now appears certain that the custom of erecting megaliths belongs to a socioreligious complex characterized by emphasis on an ancestor cult and genealogy, by wealth and fertility rites, animal sacrifice, and rank-conferring rituals that are thought to ensure for the souls of the performers or recipients a better lot in the hereafter.
The original center from which this complex spread has not yet been determined. It lay probably in the Mediterranean area, possibly in Palestine and the surrounding regions, where megalithic monuments have been dated to the fourth millennium b. In some instances the megalithic complex spread as a result of migrations, in others by slow diffusion from tribe to tribe. In studying its various aspects, we are dealing with a prehistoric religious and martin movement, which over thousands of years spread throughout an area reaching from the Atlantic coast of Europe to Oceania.
More than any other problem of diffusion, the question of trans-Pacific relations between the Old World and the New agitates anthropologists. It is crucial to all of anthropological thought. The proof of parallel development could lie in determining martin or not similar textile and metallurgical techniques, calendrical systems, art styles, etc. The inescapable conclusion would be that what happened this one time could have taken place in other instances as well.
The results of everything written since Ratzel and Boas in order to disprove independent parallel development would be jeopardized. We cannot base our theories on two contradictory sets of principles.
In recent years the problem has been studied systematically by comparing whole archeological complexes, circumscribed by area and date, both in the New World and in the Old. It is now known that art styles appeared in America not only in the biography sequence as comparable ones in Asia, but even at approximately the same dates, and that other correspondences, such as those in calendrical and cosmological systems or in metallurgy, fit into this chronological pattern.
This cannot be accidental.
There were no movements of whole populations from Asia to America, nor colonial settlements like those of the Europeans after Columbus. Arguments in favor of the independent development of ancient American civilizations that were based on the absence of Old World crops and various aspects of technology are thus less compelling.
Chinese records make it clear that at the periods in question ocean-going vessels were available both in eastern and southern Asia, vessels that could not have encountered greater difficulties in crossing the North Pacific than the clumsy Manila galleons of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
In summary, we are justified in stating that as biographies of martin stand America offers no exception to the rule according to which close similarities between complex cultural phenomena are the results of diffusion. Diffusion has always had a catalytic function in sociocultural development.
It was the opportunity for relatively rapid interchange of inventions and ideas between a number of local cultures that made possible the birth of the oldest civilizations in the Near East. It was stimuli emanating from these oldest civilizations which started the chain reaction that eventually resulted in the emergence of one civilization after the other through the whole of world history Heine-Geldern Obviously, the cultures of marginal peoples least exposed to diffusion, such as the Australians, Tasmanians, and Fuegians, have remained the most primitive known in modern times.
Other relevant material may be found in the biographies of Graebner ; Schmidt. Pages — in Jesse D. An Introduction to Primitive Culture. The Science of Cultural Anthropology. Viking Fund Publications in Anthropology, No. Wenner-Gren Foundation for Anthropological Research. Koppers, Wilhelm Diffusion: Pages — in William L. Race, Language, Culture, Psychology, Pre-history. Edited by David G. American Antiquity 18, no. American Anthropologist New Series Any society can be looked upon as forming an ordered system in which all individuals and all pieces of material equipment, including land, are component parts, linked together in a multitude of ways.
Such a system may quite possibly remain in a stable state for a long period of time, in the sense that economic, social, and cultural activities are carried on over days, seasons, and years according to a fixed rhythmical pattern with an invariable structure and a stereotyped distribution of roles. Changes take place only as quantitative adjustments owing to changes in size of population. If in a subregion of the system a hitherto unknown element is introduced, biography of martin, for example, a new technical device, a new way of allotting social roles, or a new cultural manifestation, this event constitutes a perturbation that under certain conditions may be transmitted out into the surrounding regions and propagate itself until eventually the whole system has become permeated and at the same time to some degree transformed.
A permeation of this kind, either partial or total, is known as a diffusion of innovation. In some parts of the world and in certain pre-historic or historic periods, more sweeping instances of diffusion of innovation obviously have been rather unusual occurrences. On the other hand, in present-day Western societies, diffusion of innovation is in the regular course of things, and the whole social system is oriented toward constant change.
More is, however, known of the results of diffusional processes than of the processes in action, for the obvious reason that processes of this kind are extremely hard to observe. Since the time of Friedrich Ratzel the traditional way of studying diffusion, from the large-scale point of view, has been to compare the spatial distribution of cultural traits by the aid of maps. As a result of research work in this tradition, a set of national atlases of folk culture has been produced in Europe, each containing a wealth of suggestive information on preindustrial cultural relationships.
In recent decades there has been a growing interest in the study of modern instances of diffusion, and scholars have increasingly taken advantage of the fuller supply of quantitative data and the possibilities of immediate observation of ongoing processes. No doubt such studies can lead to results that also throw light on how diffusion took place earlier in history.
One approach toward the dif-fusion process focuses on the characteristics of the biography of martin individual and his reactions to his immediate environment. Another approach is more concerned with the social system as a whole. In the tradition of cultural history and cultural geography various macroconcepts come into the foreground, such as growth curves, centers of innovation and centers of spread, channels of diffusion, barriers to diffusion, cultural boundaries, and regional differences in receptivity. The diffusion of innovations will be discussed in terms of these organizing concepts.
Diffusion of innovation, as seen in its systemwide context, undoubtedly tends to show a series of recurring traits. The most easily observed pattern, when statistical information is at hand, is the curve of cumulative growth Pemberton ; Sorokin — If the number of individual adopters of innovations—or in some cases such more relevant units as villages, cities, and firms— are measured over time, an S-shaped curve normally appears. This curve shows a slow take-off stage of varying length, an intermediate stage of more rapid biography of martin, and a final stage of declining growth, which seems to approach a ceiling asymptotically.
A paradigm in need of a revolution. Proceedings of the Association of American Geographers 5, — Journal of Marketing 47, — Through paradigm-land to a normal history of science. Social Studies of Science 10, — Geography finding new role in US. Commentary-critique of Bunting-Guelke paper. Method in social science: The structure of scientific revolutions.
Philosophical Review 73, — Organism and ecosystem as geographical models. Growth and structure of geography. Institute of British Geographers 41, 1 — Geography, ideology and social concern.
The paradigm concept and the history of geography. The search for philosophic biography of martin of scientific theories. University of Illinois Press3 — Transport expansion in underdeveloped countries: Geographical Review 53, — An interpretation of the quantification debate in British Geography.
Institute of British Geographers NS 1, — The philosophy of science: Does the distinction between normal and revolutionary science hold water? Kuhn as sociologist of knowledge. British Journal of Sociology 24, — Revolutions, research programmes and human geography. Area 14, 1 — 6.
Contributors to the recent development and influence of human geography: What citation analysis suggests. Institute of British Geographers 10, — Rivers and central places: The methodological limitations of Kuhn's model of science. University of Salford, Department of GeographyDiscussion paper 8. Time resources, society, and ecology: Journal of Transport Geography.
Sociometabolic regimes in indigenous communities and the crucial role of working time: Institute of Social Ecology, Klagenfurt University. Papers of the Regional Science Association. The practice of geography. Series B, Human Geography. Huettmann, Falk; Cushman, Samuel A, eds.
Moravian Geographical Reports
Spatial complexity, informatics, and wildlife conservation. Kwan, Mei-Po December Kwan, Mei-Po; Ding, Guoxiang Environment and Planning A.
Lenntorp, Bo July Journal of Adult Development. Fishing, foraging and farming in the Bolivian Amazon: University of Minnesota Press.
Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie. Schwanen, Tim; Kwan, Mei-Po Sui, Daniel Z July Journal of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing.
Journal of Transport Geography
Tani, Sirpa; Surma-Aho, Outi This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef. Times of Neolithic Transition along the Western Mediterranean. Agent-Based Modelling in Population Studies.
Check if you have access via personal or institutional login. Log in Register Recommend to librarian. Who would you like to send this to? Please enter a valid email address Email already added. Abstract views Abstract views reflect the number of visits to the article landing page.