with anthropologists from all parts of the world at the British Association for the Sciences.
Q — Why has the number of anthropologists lately increased over what it was a few years ago?
A — Civilization is advancing with surpassing speed, and modern communications have drawn the ends of the world together; there are no longer any far-off lands, nor any people wholly cut off from the world. And in the face of these phenomena, we find these peoples taking up the new modern life quickly; so if we do not hurry to learn their history from their elders, who will soon die out — for they have no recorded history — if we do not hurry to the research, all these things will be lost to us. For this reason the number of those interested in this science has grown, with a view to saving what can be saved and recording what has gone unrecorded. And to understand a present-day people, one must know the course of its development over time.
Q — Which of such primitive peoples have you studied lately?
A — I was assigned to study the inhabitants of the "island of Samoa" and the people of "New Guinea." The first is one of the beautiful islands of the Pacific, where beauty among the women runs very high and freedom is at its widest range. I turned to studying the life of the young people there, and that ran contrary to earlier studies, for scholars until then had cared only to study the elders of a people. Thus I was the first to take an interest in the young people, the boys and the girls, twenty-five years ago; and I went back to that island last year, after that long interval, to see the vast difference between their life a quarter of a century ago and their life now. When I set to work I had to study their language and live with them exactly as they are, and how many times I would say to myself: "I cannot do it, I cannot" — until one day I noticed that I was saying this not in my English but in the Samoan language, and only then did I know that I could learn the language and carry out the task.
Q — Will you be able to study the people of some of the remote districts of this country (Saudi Arabia)?
A — The short time I have keeps me from making an adequate study, especially since such a study
demands a longer time than the study of a people with no past and no historical heritage as rich as the history of this country — which I hope circumstances will allow me to visit again for a longer stay.
Q — Do you intend to visit any other Arab country after your stay here?
A — I do not think I can, for I must answer the invitations of three world congresses, at each of which I shall give a lecture: in Greece, in Holland, and then in West Germany, where I shall attend the international congress of the "New Education Fellowship."
Q — Do you think the field of anthropology is easier for a woman to break into than for a man, because she is finer in feeling, and for other reasons?
A — Certainly. I think it is much easier for a woman to get in touch with families to study their conditions than it is for the men of anthropology. These simple peoples shy away from strangers in general, and from a man in particular, for they believe this stranger will take their women from them. And apparently the women have no fear for their men from me!!... (Here she laughed, and I laughed, and then I added, commenting and saving the situation, saying to her: "They must be entirely sure of them — and besides, they consider you above all that!")
Q — Have you any connection with the Lebanese emigrants in the United States?
A — Since I live in New York, where there is the great number of Syrians (and we — as you know — apply the name Syrians to Lebanese and Syrians together), you find me in touch with them. In our research bureau we studied the Syrian community and the difference among the followers of the three religions — Christianity, Islam, and the Jews — and