Talk:Noble savage

Good stuff

"The notion that Rousseau’s Discourse on Inequality was essentially a glorification of the state of nature and that its influence tended to wholly or chiefly to promote 'primitivism' is one of the most persistent historical errors” –A. O. Lovejoy, “The Supposed Primitivism of Rousseau’s Discourse on Inequality, ” Modern Philology Vol. 21, No. 2 (Nov., 1923):165-186

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0026-8232(192311)21%3A2%3C165%3ATSPOR%22%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W.

(This essay may also be found in A. O. Lovejoy, Essays in the History of Ideas [Naltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1948])

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.30.152 (talk) 16:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

The "Noble Savage" is a rhetorical trope (and derogatory term) used as a strawman to attack those who questioned Western imperialism and scientific racism. Of course, all scholars know that Rousseau never refers to the Noble Savage or anything like it in any of his works, but like the proverbial zombie, the canard that he invented the concept dies hard. In his book, The Myth of the Noble Savage (Berkeley: University of Californsia Press, 2001), anthropologist Ter Ellingson has shown convincingly that no one has ever believed in the Noble Savage. (You can see that this is true from the justified objections of posters below that the examples cited in the article do not really fit into the category of the Noble Savage.) Ellingson shows how after the Sepoy Rebellion of 1861 (really 1857), two so-called "Scientific" racists, Crawfurd and Hunt took over the British Ethnographic society by castigating anyone who defended the human rights of native peoples as sentimental believers in "Rousseau's Noble Savage", as they put it. Ellingson believes that to this day anthropologists have internalized these criticisms. The idea that positive portrayals of indigenous people represent a supposed form of paternalistic patronizing is another variation on this theme.

"If Rousseau was not the inventor of the Noble Savage, who was?" writes Ellingson,

One who turns for help to [Hoxie Neale] Fairchild's 1928 study*, a compendium of citations from romantic writings on the "savage" may be surprised to find [his book] The Noble Savage almost completely lacking in references to its nominal subject. That is, although Fairchild assembles hundreds of quotations from ethnographers, philosophers, novelists, poets, and playwrights from the seventeenth century to the nineteenth century, showing a rich variety of ways in which writers romanticized and idealized those who Europeans considered "savages", almost none of them explicitly refer to something called the "Noble Savage". Although the words, always duly capitalized, appear on nearly every page, it turns out that in every instance, with four possible exceptions, they are Fairchild's words and not those of the authors cited.(Ellingson, 2001, p. 4).

The fact is that any remotely positive portrayal of an indigenous (or working class) person is apt to be characterized (out of context) as a supposedly "unrealistic" or "romanticized" Noble Savage. Ellingson points out that Fairchild includes as an example of a supposed "Noble Savage", a picture of a Negro slave on his knees, lamenting his lost freedom. According to Ellingson, Fairchild ends his book with a denunciation of the (un-named) believers in Primitivism or "The Noble Savage" -- whom he feels are threatening to unleash the dark forces of irrationality on civilization. (Ellingson, p. 380). Note than in the article here a picture of an American Indian is shown as an example of a Noble Savage, presumably because the Indian in question is depicted as handsome or idealized. It may be that the painter painted everyone he painted that way and not just Indians, as was usual during the Romantic (c. 1800 to 1860), as opposed to the "realistic", period in painting but there is no way we can find this out. 96.250.138.19 (talk) 23:38, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

The paragraphs about Lescarbot should come out. He was only saying ironically that the savages were noble, because they were able to hunt. He was not saying they were noble in any real sense. Also there is not the slightest reason to think Dryden got his phrase from that book. He was a coffee-house wit, not an anthropologist, and his phrase is a conceit, meaning "wild animal nobler than the other wild animals" (taken from Ovid). "Savage" could mean "wild animal". Esedowns (talk) 14:53, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

As a further point, surely the reference to the "merciless Indian savages" in the Declarations of Independence should be mentioned somewhere? They were considered anything but noble. (I like to mention this on 4th July!} Esedowns (talk) 10:33, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

• Hoxie Neale Fairchild The Noble Savage: A Study in Romantic Naturalism, New York, 1928.

Souldn't Savage Noble(from Beast Machines) be at least mentioned here, as his name is likely a reference to the 'noble savage', and he has the right character traits, at least to an extent.Seven-point-Mystic 12:57, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I feel as if it should be pointed out that the Noble Savage did not want to fight, but would when needed. There is a lot of explanation of how "noble" the Noble Savage is, but I do not see this point addressed anywhere. Kthacker1 (talk) 01:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I don’t think that is a general rule. People have different ideas of what is noble and often project them on noble savages. For example, if the author of a work thinks bravery is noble, then the savage might be depicted as brave. 2A01:C22:34B4:E700:210A:8529:5490:F9A6 (talk) 18:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

The content of these two paragraphs appears to be well off the topic of the "noble savage" and more appropriate to a general discussion of critiques of western imperialism. If anyone has an idea where these paragraphs might fit better, please move them. Rossami 18:56, 28 Oct 2003 (UTC)

There are no more "neolithic" people on this planet; the word "primitive" does not refer to people living in a former stage in cultural evolution, it refers to people who are at the periphery of the world capitalist economy who have been, are, or are about to be victims of Western colonial or imperialist expansion, ethnocide, and genocide.

There have been some -- many, but not all, anthropologists, and many non-anthropologists -- who developed a critique of European ethnocentrism, and sought to develop more objective understandings of non-Western peoples. They continue to challenge the presumption of European (or Western) superiority, and to challenge specific claims made by Westerners concerning human nature and the world in which humans live and act. Those who are committed to the superiority of the West and Western ideas, colonialism, ethnocide and genocide, are profoundly threatened by such attempts.

The modern use of such terms as "neolithic" may be as doomed by time and study as suich terms as "primitive". Cultures around the world did not simultaneously abandon tool use.----Kortoso 20:25, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

---

I think it is ridiculous to classify Robert E. Howard's Conan as a a 'noble savage.' Conan is a Barbarian and a plunderer; a criminal who holds to few scruples. He is admired for his strength and brutality alone, and adheres to next to zero of those attributes listed. (Chalk one up for physical health and sexual inhibition, which includes the attempted rape written in Howard's The Frost Giant's Daughter.) To consider Conan the Barbarian as morally superior to civilized man is inane. Conan's ignoble desires are primarily lust, wealth, and battle.

To me, Tarzan and Conan are both portrayed as being superior because they are from outside civilization, and often they triumph by mere virtue of that "noble" birth. Isn't that the essence of the noble savage myth? Montaigne was one of those who influenced Rousseau, and in particular his essay "On Cannibals".

Whether that means that they behave in a way that we expect them to, when confronted with civilization, may be a matter of our own expectations. I am inspired to write an essay citing the Cimmerian's "rough code" of honor using specific examples.--Kortoso 20:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

I think that is a good point. There are variations of the theme. However, sometimes a noble savage is not pure noble savage. Especially if the author doesn’t fully buy into the idea that civilization is bad or that people are naturally good. Conan may be inspired by other noble savage characters, but has more in common with Dumas´ 3 Musketeers. 2A01:C22:34B4:E700:210A:8529:5490:F9A6 (talk) 18:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

---

Erroneous Identification of Rousseau with the Noble Savage

On April 15, 2012., Dwyermz changed the section about the Erroneous Indentification of Rousseau with the Noble Savage on the grounds that he personally finds Lovejoy's 1923 conclusions "controversial". This is Original Research. Dwyermz needs to find a secondary source (a reputable scholar, not a textbook that just mindlessly repeats errors), that challenges Lovejoy on the grounds that he is "controversial" - or for any other reason. and then give source and page number. Good luck with that. Virtually all scholars that I have come across accept Lovejoy's conclusions. Not only that, but Lovejoy, who was and still is the world's foremost authority on Primitivism and Related ideas, conclusively demolished the reputation of Irving Babbitt against whose attacks on Rousseau he was arguing. As far as I know, Babbitt never was able to answer Lovejoy, and he and his views have fallen into oblivion, while Lovejoy continues to be a respected figure. have restored the gist of Lovejoy's argument -- hopefully not in too much detail. Mballen (talk)

Benjamin Franklin

This section has been extensively revised and citations added. It previously contained statements that were misleading or not backed by reliable sources. The unsupported claim that he "had good relations with American Indians during the French and Indian War" wrongly suggests that Franklin had substantial contact with indigenous people at this time. In fact, Franklin spent most of the war in England.

When the Paxton Boys marched on Philadelphia in 1764, Franklin organized the defence. Among the associators were some members of the Quaker community, however, it was not a "Quaker militia." Nor was the purpose of the associators to "temper and control racial violence" or "police the entire colonial community." Once the Paxton Boys agreed to return to their homes the associators also dispersed. Griffin's Sword (talk) 14:54, 3 July 2023 (UTC)

Earlier Use

See Marc Lescarbot (1609) for earlier reference. 2600:6C5A:87F:9698:8B37:974C:61EA:CF60 (talk) 14:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)