Notes

This text is not intended for attribution or quotation without the author's express consent.

¹ H. Glenn Penny III, "The Museum für Deutsche Geschichte and German National Identity," Central European History 28, no. 3 (1995): 343-72.

² On the early history of ethnographic collections in Germany, see Kristian Bahnson, "Über ethnographische Museen, mit besonderer Berücksichtigung der Sammlungen in Deutschland, Österreich und Italien," Mittheilungen der Anthropologischen Gesellschaft in Wien 18 (1888): 109-64; for the founding dates, see Michael Hog, Ziele und Konzeptionen der Völkerkundemuseen in ihrer historischen Entwicklung (Frankfurt am Main, 1981).

³ One need only look at George Stocking's excellent series on the history of anthropology published since 1983 by the University of Wisconsin Press. Excluding the many pieces on Boasian anthropology that made cursory reference to Germany, only two of the articles in that series were devoted to questions of German ethnology or anthropology, and the volume on ethnographic museums neglected them entirely. In 1996 a volume focused on Boas and the German anthropological tradition attempted to redress this absence, yet here too the focus was more on Boas than the role of German ethnologists in the history of anthropology. Articles by Matti Bunzl and Benoit Massin were the outstanding exceptions. Similarly, revisionist work on the history of anthropology such as the volume edited by Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink that sought to take the history of anthropology out of confines of the academy have only repeated clichés about the Germans rather than following them into the field. See Peter Pels and Oscar Salemink, ed. Colonial Subjects: Essays on the Practical History of Anthropology, Ann Arbor, Mich., 1999); and George W. Stocking Jr. ed., Volksgeist as Method and Ethic: Essays on Boasian Ethnography and the German Anthropological Tradition (Madison, Wis., 1996). See also James Whitman, "From Philology to Anthropology in Midnineteenth-Century Germany," in George W. Stocking Jr., ed., Functionalism Historicized: Essays on British Social Anthropology, History of Anthropology, vol. 2 (Madison, Wis., 1984), 214-29; and Robert Proctor, "From Anthropologie to Rassenkunde in the German Anthropological Tradition," in George W. Stocking Jr., ed., Bones, Bodies, Behavior: Essays on Biological Anthropology (Madison, Wis., 1985), 138-79.

⁴ See, e.g., Wilhelm E. Mühlmann, Geschichte der Anthropologie (Frankfurt am Main, 1968).

⁵ George W. Stocking Jr., After Tylor: British Social Anthropology, 1881-1951 (Madison, Wis., 1996); Curtis M. Hinsley Jr., Savages and Scientists: The Smithsonian Institution and the Development of American Anthropology, 1846-1910 (Washington, D.C., 1981).

⁶ For an introduction to this literature, see inter alia Tony Bennett, Birth of the Museum: History, Theory, Politics (London, 1995).

⁷ H. Glenn Penny III, "Cosmopolitan Visions and Municipal Displays: Museums, Markets, and the Ethnographic Project in Germany, 1868-1914," Ph.D. diss., University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 1999.

⁸ The classic account of these associations is Thomas Nipperdey, "Verein als soziale Struktur in Deutschland im späten 18. und frühen 19. Jahrhundert," in Thomas Nipperdey, Gesellschaft, Kultur, Theorie: Gesammelte Aufsätze zur neueren Geschichte (Göttingen, 1976), 174-205; More comprehensive is Otto Dann, Vereinswesen und burgerliche Gesellschaft in Deutschland (Munich, 1984). On the natural science associations, see Andreas W. Daum, "Naturwissenschaften und Öffentlichkeit in der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft: Zu den Anfängen einer 'Populärwissenschaft' nach der Revolution von 1848," Historische Zeitschrift 257 (Aug. 1998): 57-90.

⁹ On Humboldt's impact in Germans' popular imagination, see Andreas W. Daum, Wissenschaftspopularisierung im 19. Jahrhundert: Bürgerliche Kultur, naturwissenschaftliche Bildung und die deutsche Öffentlichkeit, 1848-1914 (Munich, 1998).

¹⁰ By far the best work on Bastian is Annemarie Fiedermutz-Laun, Der Kulturhistorische Gedanke bei Adolf Bastian: Systematisierung und Darstellung der Theorie und Methode mit dem Versuch einer Bewertung des Kulturhistorischen Gehaltes auf dieser Grundlage (Wiesbaden, 1970).

¹¹ See, e.g., Tony Bennett and Robert Rydell's discussions of world's fairs, which focus on this kind of pointed instruction. Tony Bennett, "The Exhibitionary Complex," New Formations 4 (1988): 73-102; Robert W. Rydell, All the World's a Fair: Visions of Empire at American International Expositions, 1876-1916 (Chicago, 1984).

¹² Jürgen Reulecke, Geschichte der Urbanisierung in Deutschland (Frankfurt am Main, 1985).

¹³ A number of smaller museums were also founded in smaller cities: Bremen, Cassel, Darmstadt, Freiburg im Breisgau, Karlsruhe, Lübeck, and Stuttgart, as well as more medium sized cities such as Cologne, Dresden, and Frankfurt am Main. The smaller museums, however, were generally regarded as less scientific, and those in the medium cities were founded much later; Dresden being the exception - the royal collections were refashioned into a zoological and anthropological/ ethnological museum in 1879. Sierra A. Bruckner, "The Tingle-Tangle of Modernity: Popular Anthropology and the Cultural Politics of Identity in Imperial Germany," Ph.D. diss, University of Iowa, 1999, 97.

¹⁴ Veit Valentine, Geschichte der deutschen Revolution von 1848-1849, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1931), 2:565, cited in Celia Applegate, A Nation of Provincials: The German Idea of Heimat (Berkeley, Calif., 1990), 26-7.

¹⁵ Jeffrey A. Johnson has argued something similar in his work on the Kaiser Wilhelm Society, but because he remained focused on Berlin, the tensions he identified were limited to the national and the international. See Jeffrey A. Johnson, The Kaiser's Chemists: Science and Modernization in Imperial Germany (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1990).

¹⁶ The now standard work on regional identity during the Imperial period is Applegate, A Nation of Provincials; see also James Retallack, ed., Saxony in German History: Culture, Society, and Politics, 1830-1933 (Ann Arbor, Mich., 2000).

¹⁷ Alan D. Beyerchen has argued: "If competitiveness at the forefront of science and technology is one of the hallmarks of modernity, then Germany at the opening of the twentieth century was one of the most modern countries in the world" (Alan D. Beyerchen, "On the Stimulation of Excellence in Wilhelmian Science," in Jack R. Dukes and Joachim Remak, eds., Another Germany: A Reconsideration of the Imperial Era [Boulder, Colo., 1988], 139).

¹⁸ See, e.g., Suzanne Marchand, "Leo Frobenius and the Revolt Against the West," Journal of Contemporary History 32, no. 2 (1997): 154; Volker Harms, "Das Historische Verhältnis der deutschen Ethnologie zum Kolonialismus," Zeitschrift für Kulturaustausch, no. 4 (1984): 401-16.

¹⁹ There is an overwhelming amount of literature on this topic. See inter alia George W. Stocking Jr., ed., Colonial Situations: Essays on the Contextualization of Ethnographic knowledge (Madison, Wis., 1991).

²⁰ The lack of enthusiasm for colonialism in Germany has been noted by many. See, e.g., Woodruff D. Smith, The German Colonial Empire (Chapel Hill, N.C., 1978); Woodruff D. Smith, "Colonialism and Colonial Empire," in Roger Chickering, ed., Imperial Germany: A Historiographic Companion (Westport, Conn., 1996); Ingeburg Winkelmann, "Die Bürgerliche Ethnographie im Dienste der Kolonialpolitik des Deutschen Reiches (1870-1918)," Ph.D. diss., Humboldt University of Berlin, 1966; and David Blackbourn, The Long Nineteenth Century: A History of Germany, 1780-1918 (New York, 1998), 335.

²¹ Vanessa R. Schwartz, Spectacular Realities: Early Mass Culture in Fin-de-Siècle Paris (Berkeley, Calif., 1998).

²² I have chosen the term democratization deliberately. In the history of science the term "popularization" generally implies the distribution of knowledge from on high. But what takes place in these museums is a dialogic relationship in which the distribution vectors went in both directions and visitors did become active participants in the production of knowledge, effectively changing the practice of anthropology in these museums. That said, I do not want to over emphasize the "equality" of these vectors. Clearly, the people with institutional positions retained the lion's share of the power. The best attempt to deal with this problem is Andreas Daum's use of the term Vermittler (intermediary), although it does not strike me as helpful within the context of these museums. See Daum, Wissenschaftspopularisierung im 19. Jahrhundert.

²³ Thanks to Sue Marchand for her help and insights into this particular problem.