Diffusionism and Evolutionism as Explanations of Culture Change — 2015 Paper I
How do diffusionism and evolutionism differ as explanations of Culture Change ?
Model Answer
VAID ICSApproach
- Demand of Question: Compare evolutionism and diffusionism as alternative anthropological explanations of cultural change.
- Structuring the Response: Explain their assumptions, mechanisms and major scholars, then compare their strengths and limitations systematically.
- Key Dimensions to Cover: Tylor, Morgan, Frazer, unilinear evolution, diffusion, culture circles, British diffusionism, German-Austrian school, independent invention and historical contact.
Model Answer
Introduction: Evolutionism and diffusionism were two early anthropological explanations of cultural change. Evolutionists explained similarities largely through independent development through common stages, whereas diffusionists emphasized the spread of cultural traits through contact between societies.
Evolutionist explanation
Nineteenth-century evolutionists such as:
- E.B. Tylor;
- L.H. Morgan;
- James Frazer
argued that human societies develop from relatively simple toward increasingly complex forms.
Morgan’s model illustrates this:
Savagery → Barbarism → Civilization
Evolutionists assumed:
- broad psychic unity of humankind;
- similar problems produce similar inventions;
- cultural institutions develop through recognizable stages;
- similarities between distant societies may arise through independent invention.
Culture change was therefore largely interpreted as:
Internal development → Increasing complexity
Diffusionist explanation
Diffusionists reacted against the evolutionists’ tendency to assume repeated independent invention.
They argued that cultural traits often spread through:
- migration;
- borrowing;
- trade;
- conquest;
- intermarriage;
- other forms of contact.
Thus:
Culture A → Contact → Trait transmission → Culture B
German-Austrian diffusionism
Scholars such as Fritz Graebner and Wilhelm Schmidt developed the idea of Kulturkreise or culture circles.
Complexes of related traits were believed to originate in particular centres and spread geographically.
British diffusionism
- Elliot Smith and W.J. Perry adopted an extreme diffusionist position, arguing that many major cultural inventions originated in Egypt and subsequently spread elsewhere.
This hyper-diffusionism greatly underestimated independent invention.
Major differences
| Evolutionism | Diffusionism |
| Emphasizes internal development | Emphasizes external transmission |
| Similarity due to psychic unity/independent invention | Similarity due mainly to historical contact |
| Focus on stages | Focus on geographical spread |
| Primarily developmental | Primarily historical |
| Tylor, Morgan, Frazer | Graebner, Schmidt, Elliot Smith |
| Often unilinear | Often culture-area/culture-circle oriented |
Different views of cultural similarity
For an evolutionist:
Similar trait in A and B → Similar stage of development
For a diffusionist:
Similar trait in A and B → Possible borrowing/common origin
Contributions
Evolutionism drew attention to:
- long-term cultural transformation;
- comparative study;
- increasing complexity of institutions.
Diffusionism highlighted:
- migration;
- historical contact;
- borrowing;
- geographical distribution of cultural traits.
Limitations
Evolutionism was criticized for:
- speculative reconstruction;
- ethnocentrism;
- unilinear assumptions.
Diffusionism was criticized because:
- extreme forms reduced invention to very few centres;
- borrowing does not explain why societies accept, reject or modify traits;
- internal innovation and adaptation were underestimated.
Contemporary synthesis
Modern anthropology recognizes that culture changes through several interacting mechanisms:
Invention + Diffusion + Adaptation + Historical circumstances
Borrowed traits are also rarely copied mechanically; receiving societies select and reinterpret them.
Conclusion
Evolutionism explains culture change primarily through internal developmental processes, while diffusionism stresses historical transmission between societies. Both captured real processes but became inadequate when treated exclusively. Contemporary anthropology therefore views cultural change as the result of innovation interacting with diffusion, local adaptation and historical context.
Want feedback on your answer?
Join the Anthropology workshop or get structured answer-writing guidance from VAID ICS.