Hi Wilf,
Shirt answer is that it doesn't require an Anthropologist. The long(er) answer is that you need an Anthropologist in the loop because of potential problems in interpreting the data and, in many cases, even figuring out what questions to ask.Originally Posted by William F. Owen
Wilf, the Brits had a major advantage over the US in having their soldiers do this type of work. A lot of early style ethnography was actually pioneered by serving British military officers, especially in India during the 19th century. But about the only reason that that actually worked well was because of two factors.
First, the average Brit officer in, say, 1850 or so had a classical education, including Latin and Greek. They were used to dealing with a much longer time horizon than the average US officer, and they also had several other skills that led to an almost automatic comparative attitude (especially multiple languages).
Second, British colonial officers, or officers in the various company armies, tended to deal with sepoy troops from multiple cultures. Again, that reinforces a comparative perspective when looking at phenomena.
But both of these are absent with the vast majority of US troops. While I applaud the fact that West Point remains one of the few places where students are required to read the classics, that doesn't mean that it is the same as struggling through Caesar's Gallic Wars, in Latin, at age 10, or reading Arrian at the same age.
Put simply, British officers had the cultural capital that enabled them to take a long time horizon and have a large historical database to draw on, while most US troops don't. And that time horizon and historical / comparative database are the base requirements for Anthropologists.
Bookmarks