Global Journal of Human Social Science, D: History, Archaeology and Anthroplogy, Volume 23 Issue 3

From 1890 to 1906 he taught Sociología at Helsinki´s University, from 1894 to 1897 he taught Phillosophy at that same university, and in 1898 began a new phase in his life: he made his first voyages to Marocco In 1894 he had settled down in London, and from then until 1907 he taught Sociología in the London School of Economics. In 1907 he was appointed the first Martin White profesor of Sociología in the London School of Economics, appointed for five years, with a salary derived from a fund by the Scottish philantropist Martin White. The fund was made permanent in 1911, and Westermarck occupied the chair until his retirement. Edward Westermarck was important in British social sciences in England and in Finland: “Westermarck, who was professor of the University of Helsinki (and, later, of the Académic University of Aabo) as well as of the London School of Economics, was a Pioneer of sociology in Finland. Two of his students, Gunnar Landtman and Rafael Karsten, did fieldwork following the British model, and published their most important texts in England, whereas Hilma Granquist broke with her supervisor (Landtman), when she decided to do fieldwork in Palestine” (Suolinna, 2000: 317). There is even talk about a Westermarck school in Finnish sociology, a school that was closely related to Britis sociology and anthropoloy. Two very important names in that school were exactly the British-Finnish anthropologists Gunnar Landtman y Rafael Karsten. It is clearly seen that there existed a close relation between the social sciences in Finland, especially the Westermarck school, and British anthropology, but it is a very complicated relation, as we see it in the Finniish sociologist Hilma Granquist´s career. The principal (although not the only) promotor of the anti-evolucionista movement in British anthropology was Bronislaw Malinowski, who was a student of Edward Westermarck and who, together with Charles Seligman, was his most important source of inspiration. Howver, neither Westermarck nor his students Gunnar Landtman y Rafael Karsten never abandoned their evolucionist position. I am very careful in writing Finnish “social sciences”, as there is no clear distinction between anthropology and sociology, neither in Finland nor in England. Of this we have a quite clear proof in an article of Landtman´s about Finnish folklore. The article starts thus: “It is Kallevalle, the Finns´ épic poem, that represents the greatest contribution to the Finnish people´s science of folklore” (Landtman, 1930: 319). We have to remember that in British social scinces there is not a very clear line that separates folklore and anthropology. At a certain moment there was a rather hazy division of labor hat asigned the study of tradition in England to folklor, whereas tradition in the colonies (the Third World) was a problem belonging to the world of anthropology (and sociology). This curious tensión is revealed very clearly in Hilma Granquist´s career, about which it is said that “she fell victim to a scientific school in decline. Her career was totally blocked in Finland. In spite of this she managed to gain international prestige, but she had to work alone, without support and encouragement” (Suolinna, 2000: 317). It is maybe significant in this complicated situation of conflict between evolutionism and the abyss that separates British social anthropology and North American cultural anthropology that Margaret Mead, absolutely removed from British social anthropology, was the one who published some of Gunnar Landtman´s texts, as has been mentioned earlier. However, the gossip about Landtman and Karsten is useful in showing, through the person of Westermarck, how close a relation there was between Finnish sociology, of which we can consider Westermarck a founding father, and British sociaology (and social anthropology), remembering that Westermarck was the first Martin White Professor of Sociology in the London School of Economics. And there is a serious background to all this gossip about Finns in London. If we keep in mind that British social anthropology can be defined as the scientific charter of British colonialism, we can ask the question of why the presence of so many anthropologists in London from the periphery of the metrópolis, that is from Poland and Finland. IV. G unnar L andtman’s F ieldwork It is a pleasure to read Landtman´s description of how he arrived in his fieldsite in New Guinea, it really reads as if it were the introduction to a novel by Joseph Conrad from the South Sea: “We arrived in Thursday Island late in the night and could not moor in the night, but at six o´clock in the morning we went ashore. On the twelfth of April 1910 I finished my sea voyage, and from this moment on I had to do things the way circumstances permitted. I walked impatiently up and down the deck without any knowledge of how my situation would develop. However, I was convinced that from the moment we touched land, the first hours would clarify the situation in many aspects. I looked at the terrain with a máximum of curiosity, trying to imagine the islands with their high hills and their dry land covered with a dense forest, with stretches of beach in various parts, and the open sea splendid in the orizon, in all a very attractive landsccape. Finally we moored at the long pier and I went ashore, leaving for the momento my belongings on board. Thursday Island had the aspect of a small town with two streets running parallel to the beach – but there was not much else. But the beach was magnificent, with its fine sand. The majority of the small buildings had tin roofs, and on one side there was a line of black closed cisterns (wáter tanks of galvanized iron) (Landtman, 1913: 29). Gunnar Landtman did his fieldwork in two years, from 1910 to 1912, but it took a long time before his © 2023 Global Journals Volume XXIII Issue III Version I 61 ( ) Global Journal of Human Social Science - Year 2023 D Gunnar Landtman (1878-1940)