Here is your free sample essay on diffusion

Cultural diffusion is one of the kinds of the processes of cultural evolution. Adoption of new things by one individual or society from another individual or society is called diffusion. Almost all the cultures of the world are adopting new things every day through the diffusion of modern western culture.

It was through diffusion that the influence of the culture evolving at the banks of Nile River reached India; Indian modes of thought reached China and played an important part in the growth of western culture. It was again due to diffusion that the cultures of Mycene, Crete and Egypt influenced the Greek culture.

In the same way, modern cultures also keep on influencing other cultures through diffusion. Ogburn and Nimkoff, while defining diffusion, have written that a transmission of culture traits from one area to another and from one culture to another is called diffusion.

Railway train, motor cars, aeroplanes, cinemas, tanks, telephone, telegraph and television etc. and thousands of other things seen in the modern world today are the examples of such a transmission.

Not only instruments and machines but even ideas keep moving from one country to another. Religion of Buddha spread from India to China, Japan, Burma and other countries. Communism from Russia went to other countries. Indian decimal system crossed to Arabia and Europe. The following factors help in diffusion:

(a) Contact and communication. (b) The desire and need of new traits, (c) Competition with old traits and their opposition, (d) Respect for those who invent or bring in new traits.

Diffusion is possible among different societies and even in one and the same society; unprecedented development of the means of conveyance and communication have been the cause of a high speed of diffusion in the present century.

The German scholars, Graebner, Ankermann and Schmidt have done important work in the establishment and spread of diffusion theory. Their ideology is called Culture Historic Schule. According to this ideology, similarity in two cultures cannot be regarded as a result of diffusion so long as historical evidences affecting their mutual contact are not given.

Part played by Diffusion.

R. Linton, in his book ‘The Study of Man’ has given in details the influence of diffusion in American life. For example, the bed which an American leaves in the morning was invented in near East and was reformed in Europe; the curtains which he removes are made of the cotton which was first grown in India. If the curtains are made of silk, they were invented in near East. If they are made of linen, they were discovered in China. The soft leather moccasin shoes, which he puts on after leaving his bed, were made by red Indians of North America.

The bath room which he enters after this is the result of modern European and American inventions. The trousers which he puts on were first made in India. The soap which he uses in cleaning his hands was first made by the people of ancient Gal. After this, the razor which he uses in shaving was made in Sumer of Egypt.

In the same way, among so many other things of his use, his neck-tie is the residual of the shawl used by Croation people on their shoulders in the 17th century. The felt of his cap is the invention of Asian Steppes. The umbrella used in rains is a discovery of South East Asia, and the rubber of the shoes he puts on is the invention of the primitive inhabitants of America.

Among his utensils, plate is an invention of China, his knife is made of steel invented in South India, his fork is the invention of Italy in the middle period and his spoon is the invention of ancient Rome.

Among the articles of food, orange is the discovery of Mediterranean countries, coffee of Abyssimia, tea of China and sugar of India.

The pipe which he smokes has come from Mexico. The tobacco used in both these things was first grown in Brazil. If he uses cigar, it is the origin of Antelese of Western Indian archipelago. If he reads a newspaper, it is of the product of the printing system invented in Germany.

It appears from this long statement of R. Lintoji that the modern American culture is a diffusion of so many other cultures. It shows the importance of diffusion in the evolution of culture.

Diffusional anthropologists disapprove the claim of evolutionists that the similarities found in different cultures of the world are evolved not because of diffusion, but because of separate evolution of similar traits in different cultures, not because of reciprocal adaptability, but because of free evolution. But the .fact, that many other different traits of culture change places only through diffusion, cannot be ignored.

The claim of evolutionists that evolution is the only cause of cultural similarities is therefore although unscientific. On the other hand, their statement that cultures, in their order of evolution, have passed through similar situations everywhere in the world is also incorrect.

That people’s culture of one place is undoubtedly influenced by the other people reaching there from a superior culture is a matter of common experience. A mutual exchange of culture does take place among the people living close to one another.

For example, people who live close to one another cannot remain without speaking to one another and speaking can be possible only when they understand and adopt some words from the language of one another.

Then, when they began to speak, a change in their wearing apparel, ornaments, utensils and even in outside life through mutual cultural influence can be observed. Diffusion in cultures coming in close contact with one another is thus unavoidable. Migrating individuals carry culture traits from one place to another and diffuse them into people of the place where they reach. Thus diffusion is one of the causes of finding cultural traits among different culture groups.

German diffusionists

Among the modern diffusionists who have laid stress on the importance of diffusion in the growth of culture, there are two classes in Europe, German diffusionists and British diffusionists. In the beginning of the 20th century, Graebner, Ankermann and Schmidt presented, in Germany, the theory of diffusion in culture and since then their disciples have been regularly advocation the theory.

These diffusionists believed that a diffusion of different cultural traits took place in the world in different places and periods and these cultural traits later spread to other parts of the world through diffusion. The cultural traits which thus spread through diffusion can clearly be identified in culture.

This class of German diffusionists is known as ‘Culture Historic Schule’, because it has shown the contribution of diffusion in particular culture by sketching its historical evolution. These scholars exemplify diffusion mostly through material culture and do not give evidence from diffusion of social institutions. But Graebner’s contribution to the study of culture, in establishing criteria of quantiton to the study of culture, in establishing criteria of quantity and form of diffusion, was very important.

He stressed the point that in the absence of historical evidence, it cannot be said on the basis of outward similarity alone that similar traits appear in tow cultures due to cultural diffusion. The evidence of diffusion will be accepted only when, along that similar traits appear in two cultures due to cultural diffusion.

The evidence of diffusion will be accepted only when, along with similarity of form, there appears similarity of number and the arrangement of constituent elements of cultural traits.

Culture area approach

German diffusionists presented the view of culture area in order to define diffusion. When Graebner and other thinkers were engaged in search of facts to prove.the example of diffusion, Franz Boas raised the question why diffusion, after all, took place. Boas classified the study of diffusion into different stages.

According to him, facts about different situations shoidd are described first. After that, proceeding from particular to general, analytic study should be done wherein, before talking about continents and the world, a factual distribution of special culture traits need be given. According to Boas the root causes of diffusion he in the psychic make up of an individual.

What Boas meant by restricted area was called cultural area by Clark Wissler. He pointed out that narrowing down the diffusion area was very necessary. He showed how no culture trait, specially if it is non-material, can migrate to distant areas without undergoing a change in transit.

It loses some of its specialities in the process of diffusion and picks up from other cultures some such traits which it did not possess in the beginning. According to Wissler, there is a central point of diffusion in every culture area and the limits of diffusion are fixed. The forms of culture traits continuously keep changing in proceeding from central point to their limits and its traits become indistinct.

Material obstacles in the diffusion of culture provide the cause of this change. Mountains, oceans, deserts and distances cause obstacles in the process of diffusion. Besides this, the areas, through which the traits of any culture are diffused, break its adjustment and it is not diffused as it is. To prove his theory, Wissler sketched many different American cultures and described the technological, artistic and institutional traits of every area. He showed that many particular human societies can be found in one and the same cultural area. Some people live in boundary limits of two cultural areas and are found to possess traits of both these cultures. These areas can be called boundary areas.

British Diffusionists

As has been said before, besides the Culture Historic he Schule, the names of British diffusionists among the scholars who examined cultural diffusion are included. In fact, British scholar, Tylor, talked about cultural diffusion much earlier than German and American diffusionists.

He has written that culture was like a plant which is diffused from one place to another much more rapidly than its free growth. He had drawn a map of the diffusion of many culture traits which can be known, not from the name of British diffusionist, Tylor, but from the name of E. W. Smith, W.J. Perry and their disciples.

They came among the diffusionists first, but were also the first in losing their names. They are also called Egyptologists because they have regarded Egypt as a centre of world culture originated through diffusion from Egypt, but their theory has not been proved in figures. They have given a strange argument to prove their viewpoint.

They said that people greatly lacked in their imaginative and inventive capacities. They said that people invented only through excitements created by very favourable environment and that a favourable environment of the kind was available only in ancient Egypt.

Thus, they maintained that human culture origined first among Egyptians whom Perry has called the Progeny of the Sun and that it was from there that culture institutions were diffused everywhere in the world.

There were many such errors in the theory of British diffusionists because of which it was greatly criticized. Hutton pointed out that many culture traits originated generally in different areas due to different causes.

Hutton gave many, examples to prove it, such as fire piston, he said, was invented independently in Asia and France. Magic, medicine and many other technological apparatus were similarly invented separately in different areas of the world. Perry tried to give a counter reply to this criticism of Hutton.

It is true that just as the evolution of similar culture traits in different places alone is not enough to declare the diffusion to be incorrect, in the same way, it would not on the other hand appear correct to say that culture traits have been diffused from one place to everywhere on earth.

The truth is that there cannot be only one reason of sameness of culture traits. If one culture trait is the outcome of free evolution in cultures existing separately; the other culture trait reaches other places through diffusion from the place of its origin.

It is not correct to say that human being is quite unimaginative and uninventive, and to say that evolution can be shown in one straight line. The fact is that the very question whether a particular culture came into existence through evolution or diffusion is wrong, because as a matter of fact, both of these processes are responsible for the growth of culture.

A particular or a similar culture trait can be caused by evolution or diffusion, and which of these is the real cause cannot be ascertained by any pre-established theory. It can be decided only after studying actual facts related to it.