The archive.

A tjurunga is not a soul but a second body, binding an Aranda man to his totem ancestor and arming him with creative power; kugi, in central New Guinea, names an undifferentiated swarm of the dead, of illness, and of the uncanny. Assembled as a reader in the history of religion, this 1927 volume gathers source accounts of Australian, Papuan-Melanesian, and Polynesian-Micronesian belief, arranged so that each idea sits inside its own social and material culture. Thurnwald sets tjurunga songs and kangaroo-increase rites beside the Kai notion of Seelenstoff—soul-substance clinging to shadow, name, and voice—and the Marind-anim Majo cult of coconut fertility. The Polynesian materials turn on mana, against which no one can prevail, and on tapu, which means not holy or defiled but forbidden through sanctity or custom.

Die Welt der „Seelenstoffe“ umgibt den Eingeborenen ringsum mit geheimnisvollen Kräften, so daß er kein Ding, keine Begebenheit, abstrakt betrachten kann.

English translation: “The world of "soul-substances" surrounds the native on all sides with mysterious forces, so that he cannot contemplate any thing or any event in an abstract manner.”

A pot’s shape cannot tell us who made it, how it travelled, or why its makers declined a seemingly useful innovation. In this 1929 encyclopedia contribution, Richard Thurnwald brings comparative ethnography to the problems of prehistoric interpretation, treating technology as inherited skill and socially organized practice rather than an inventory of objects. Pottery anchors his inquiry: mobility can favour baskets over ceramics, trade can obscure production sites, and tribute obligations can reshape the division of craft labour. Ritual precautions, too, enter his account of how difficult skills are learned and sustained. Although his classifications and conjectures retain assumptions of contemporary ethnology, his concrete comparisons expose a persistent interpretive danger: mistaking material resemblance for shared history, or technical possibility for inevitable adoption.

A binding obligation need not be a contract. In this 1929 encyclopedia article, Richard Thurnwald makes that distinction the basis of a comparative inquiry into what secures agreements: ritual acts, prescribed words, political authority, or dependence on another’s resources. Against Mauss and Davy, he rejects customary gift obligations as a universal origin of contract. His cattle-leasing examples give the problem a concrete edge: an arrangement for subsistence can also sustain political subordination, blurring the boundary between private agreement and public authority. The article offers readers a way to examine consent alongside rank, kinship, and enforcement, while its ethnographic comparisons expose tensions within Thurnwald’s own proposed progression from binding acts through verbal formulas to consensual agreement.

What distinguishes regular administration from the exercise of authority? In this brief 1929 encyclopedia entry, Richard Thurnwald sets a precise threshold: an archaic state must have developed an officialdom with assigned functions that constitutes a distinct social stratum. The entry offers a compact definition rather than an extended argument, making specialization and social differentiation—not merely rule—the criteria for administration, before directing readers to “Staat” for fuller treatment.

Marriage prohibitions and sexual conduct do not necessarily coincide: this distinction opens Richard Thurnwald’s brief encyclopedia article, Verwandtenheirat (1929). He tentatively connects restrictions on marriage between relatives with alliances among communities, rather than explaining them by blood relationship alone. Maternal or paternal right and neighboring customs further shape the permitted unions. The entry offers a compact glimpse of his comparative approach to kinship: marriage rules emerge through relations both within communities and between them, while their existence does not establish how people actually behave.

Markets without centralized states, wealth accumulated for obligatory generosity, and shared food alongside individually owned tools unsettle familiar divisions between economic systems. In this 1929 encyclopedia article, Richard Thurnwald asks how subsistence, exchange and work become intelligible through the social relations that organize them. Drawing on ethnography, Oceanian observations and ancient history, he resists both a compulsory sequence of economic stages and the assumption of universal acquisitive self-interest. Festival markets on the lower Augusta River and the circulation of Kula valuables give concrete substance to his distinctions between profit, prestige and obligation. His hierarchical terminology and broad cultural generalizations require critical scrutiny, but his comparisons offer a precise question to pursue: when does control over goods become authority over people?

The household, rather than the individual craftsman, anchors Richard Thurnwald’s explanation of craft guilds in this compact encyclopedic entry. He asks how skills guarded by families and concentrated in particular settlements become the basis of corporate organization. His comparative perspective links kinship and technical mastery to political obligations: artisan communities owe collective payments in kind to the state, with their head responsible for delivery. Yet organization need not bring prestige, as his South Arabian examples suggest. Read as a proposed genealogy rather than a continuous institutional history, Zunft offers a way to distinguish occupational specialization, social standing, and corporate authority without assuming that the familiar arrangements of medieval European crafts were guild organization’s original form.

Can sociology seek recurring patterns without reducing human purposes to mechanical causes? In this brief encyclopedia entry, Richard Thurnwald presents Thomas Achelis as a thinker who combined inductive inquiry into social structures with psychological explanation. Thurnwald argues that Achelis’s opposition to prevailing Hegelianism left his sociology less influential than it deserved, while his philosophical-psychological anthropology drew attacks from the Berlin school. The entry’s interest lies in this compact methodological portrait: biological conditions provide a starting point, but motives and purposes require an additional kind of explanation. Readers encounter Thurnwald’s appreciative assessment of an approach that sought regularities in human association without treating those regularities as exhaustive.

Why do otherwise dissimilar cultures share particular customs? In this brief biographical encyclopedia entry, supplied in its 1937 republication, Richard Thurnwald presents Richard Andrée through his comparisons of such practices as the evil eye, mourning mutilations and personal naming across geographically distant peoples. Thurnwald distinguishes Andrée’s attention to recurring traits from his explanation of them: independent origins grounded in the supposed sameness of the human mind and uniformity of cultural progress. By noting Andrée’s misgivings and placing his conclusions before the development of diffusionist theory, Thurnwald offers a compact account of the tension between observing cultural parallels and explaining how they arose.

How does an injury become an obligation binding an entire family—and why does compensation sometimes fail to end the killing? In this concise encyclopedia entry, Richard Thurnwald treats blood vengeance as an organized relation between kin groups, shaped by unequal power rather than merely by personal anger. His New Britain example follows retaliation through innocent families until it reaches an influential offender who could not be attacked directly. Alongside such escalation, he identifies restraints: proportional retaliation, exceptions for unintended injury, and settlements through payment or humiliation. These comparisons expose the tension between feud’s internal rules and its capacity to perpetuate violence. Thurnwald’s categorical claim that only strong political authority can displace private vengeance gives readers a pointed historical argument about the boundary between compensation and public punishment.

From his editorial desk in Zehlendorf on 15 June 1931, Thurnwald answers Dr. Ernst Harms with the courteous firmness of a journal editor holding a line. Writing for the Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie und Soziologie, he reports that the contributions to the symposium, already excessively swollen, have been definitively closed, and that Harms's submitted review of Halfdan Bryn's book falls short of the scientific standards the journal is obliged to impose. One door he leaves ajar: a manuscript on the theory of an experimental Völkerpsychologie may be considered once he can examine it in hand, and Harms is directed to the publisher C. L. Hirschfeld about his lecture on folk character and cultural progress. A brief document, it catches the gatekeeping labor behind an interwar scientific periodical.

The opening volume of a five-part survey of human society sets itself against sociology's habit of generalizing from a narrow European sample, and against the Kulturkreis theorists who treated cultural goods as museum objects passed mechanically between peoples. Thurnwald's method is the representative Lebensbild: concrete communities—Polar Eskimo, Bushmen, Andaman Islanders, Copper Eskimo, Maori—shown whole, so that institutions appear functioning inside real cultural systems rather than sorted into ideal types. Foragers are ranged by habitat across ice, steppe, forest, and water, then plant-cultivators and herders. Running through everything is a distinction he presses hard: the irreversible accumulation of technique and knowledge against the reversible, pendulum-like swings between mother-right and father-right. Institutions such as blood revenge or asylum, he warns, cut across so-called culture circles and cannot be identified mechanically with them.

Die Feldbauer sind bei den Expansionen keine „Imperialisten“, sondern eher Gründer neuer Tochtervölker und Niederlassungen, sie sind „Kolonisatoren“, aber keine „Eroberer“.

English translation: “In their expansions, agriculturalists are not "imperialists" but rather founders of new daughter peoples and settlements; they are "colonizers," but not "conquerors.”