Revision summary
Evolutionism treats change as internal progress or energy growth. Diffusionism treats change as movement of traits from a source. Extreme Egyptocentric diffusion failed. Boas used cautious diffusion as culture history. Most real change mixes local development and contact.
Model answer
Introduction
Evolutionism explains change as internal development along stages. Diffusionism explains change as traits travelling from a centre. They answer different questions about the same pots and myths.
Body
Evolutionism
- Tylor and Morgan treated culture as progressive. Independent invention could produce similar stages.
- Change is mainly from within: new technique, new family, new gods as society grows more complex.
- White later measured evolution by energy capture. Steward allowed many lines, still developmental.
Diffusionism
- Graebner and the Kulturkreis school mapped trait complexes moving as packages.
- British Elliot Smith and Perry overplayed Egypt as the single source of civilisation.
- American Boas and Kroeber used diffusion without the Egypt story: a trait has a history of contact.
The difference that matters
- Evolution asks how a form grows in place. Diffusion asks from where it was borrowed.
- Goldenweiser limited parallelism. A canoe design may spread; a state may still evolve locally.
- Good method names both: Childe’s Neolithic spread is diffusion of a package; urbanism also has local take-off.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD CH[Culture change] --> EV[Evolution internal stages] CH --> DF[Diffusion borrowed traits] EV --> T[Tylor Morgan White] DF --> K[Kulturkreis Kroeber]
Conclusion
Evolutionism writes change as development. Diffusionism writes it as borrowing. Culture change in the field is usually a mix of the two.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Does diffusion deny human inventiveness?
Only the extreme form does. Moderate diffusion admits invention at a centre and then travel.
-
Can both be true for one trait?
Yes. Pottery may be invented once, then diffuse, then evolve new shapes in each valley.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2021 · Q1(c) · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Historical Particularism and Franz Boas -
2015 · Q1(e) · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Historical Particularism.
More from this topic
Q1(c) · UPSC Mains 2021 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Historical Particularism and Franz Boas
Historical particularism (Boas)
Historical particularism treats each culture as a unique historical product. Boas rejected Morgan–Tylor unilinear stages. Diffusion and invention must be proved, not assumed from similarity. Race, language, and culture are independent. Heirs used culture areas and texts; the risk is trait-listing.
Q1(e) · UPSC Mains 2015 · Anthropology GS 1 · 10 marks
Historical Particularism.
Historical particularism (Boas)
Boas treated each culture as a unique historical product. Unilinear stages of Morgan and Tylor were rejected. Method was fieldwork, language, and trait history. Kroeber and Lowie spread culture-area work. The limit is description without later controlled comparison.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.