Le Nord : revue internationale des Pays de Nord - 01.06.1944, Page 323
A FINNISH SOCIOLOGIST
283
of a proper criticism of sources and stresses the fact that the
comparative method can only be adopted where clearly defined
facts are forthcoming from different quarters. He prefers to
view with scepticism reports by chance travellers and missionaries
without professional training, and scientists who have spent only
short periods with primitive peoples whose language they are
unable to speak or whom they have studied solely from a mis-
sionary station. Karsten has himself learnt Indian languages.10
I do not on all points agree with Karsten’s criticism of the com-
parative school. In view of certain outstanding features common
to primitive civilization, and taking into account the number of
reliable ethnological monographs available from different parts
of the world, a case could very well be made out for a critical
study based on sources, in which the comparative method could
be applied to, for example, such major social institutions as forms
of government, chieftainship, trade, inter-tribal relations. For
that matter, Karsten himself makes an exception to his general
principle in the case of primitive religion, in which field he has
not been afraid to attempt a comparative exposition of the pro-
blem, although he rightly stresses the difficulty for any single
worker of mastering the enormous material already available.
It seems to me that Karsten is inclined to attach too much
importance to magic and, religious factors as determining the
greater part of primitive social life in general. Yet his views
in this respect are fully borne out by his own researches, and
no one will deny that precisely this element had long been ignored
by previous investigators in South America. Whether the con-
clusions drawn by Karsten from his South American material
permit generalizations as sweeping as those attempted by him
is another matter. This notwithstanding, Karsten’s great mono-
graphs and his work of a more comprehensive character dealing
with Indian civilization in South America will assuredly prove
to be of the same fundamental importance in Indian studies as
Westermarck’s are in regard to Arab and early Mohammedan
civilization, Spencer’s and Gillen’s monographs for Australian
research, or Seligman’s and Malinovski’s in our knowledge of
Melanesian civilization.
Thorough and critical are adjectives that apply to all of
Karsten’s works. Summing up one’s impressions of this solid
scientist, one willingly acquiesces in Westermarck’s verdict:11 “He
is a trained sociologist, and an acute and thoughtful observer.”
19*