Misplaced Pages

Negroid: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 22:50, 10 April 2007 view source75.22.239.83 (talk) Challenges← Previous edit Latest revision as of 06:29, 17 December 2024 view source Elmidae (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Rollbackers47,127 edits Undid revision 1263445209 by Bismvth (talk) there's an explicit reference...Tag: Undo 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Short description|Outdated grouping of human beings}}
]
{{pp-semi-indef}}
'''Negroid''' is a largely-archaic term used to describe one of the "]", a view now mostly regarded as an over-simplification of the spectrum of human diversity. Negroids are the most genetically diverse of the historically defined races, including both the world's tallest ethnic group (African ]s) and the world's shortest ethnic group (African ]).


'''Negroid''' (less commonly called '''Congoid''') is an ] of various people indigenous to ] south of the area which stretched from the southern ] desert in the west to the ] in the southeast,<ref>"A very prominent racial dividing line between African Caucasian and Negroid groups runs west to east, south of the Sahara Desert into Sudan before curving southward toward the Kenyan-Somali border." Stephen Emerson, Hussein Solomon, ''African security in the twenty-first century: Challenges and opportunities'', Oxford University Press (2018), .</ref> but also to isolated parts of ] and ] (]s).<ref>{{cite book|last=Molnar|first=Stephen|title=Human Variation: Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups|year=2006|publisher=Pearson Prentice Hall|isbn=978-0-13-192765-0|page=23|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bMO0AAAAIAAJ}}</ref> The term is derived from now-disproven conceptions of race as a biological category.<ref>{{cite book|author=Templeton, A.|year=2016|chapter=Evolution and Notions of Human Race|editor1=Losos, J.|editor2=Lenski, R. |title=How Evolution Shapes Our Lives: Essays on Biology and Society|pages=346–361|place=Princeton; Oxford|publisher=Princeton University Press|doi=10.2307/j.ctv7h0s6j.26}}</ref>
==Definitions ==


The concept of dividing humans into three races called ], ], and Negroid (originally named "Ethiopian") was introduced in the 1780s by members of the ] and further developed by Western scholars in the context of "]" during the age of ].<ref name="AAPARace">{{cite web|author=American Association of Physical Anthropologists|title=AAPA Statement on Race and Racism |website=American Association of Physical Anthropologists|access-date=19 June 2020 |date=27 March 2019 |url=https://physanth.org/about/position-statements/aapa-statement-race-and-racism-2019/}}</ref>
*The ] defines negroid as an ''adjective relating to the division of humankind represented by the indigenous peoples of central and southern Africa. ..The term Negroid is associated with outdated notions of racial types; it is potentially offensive and best avoided.''<ref>http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/negroid?view=uk</ref>


With the rise of modern ], the concept of distinct human races in a biological sense has become obsolete. In 2019, the ] stated: "Race does not provide an accurate representation of human biological variation. It was never accurate in the past, and it remains inaccurate when referencing contemporary human populations."<ref name="AAPARace" />
*According to ] the negroid race is ''a major racial division of mankind originating and predominating in sub-Saharan Africa. Skin pigmentation is dense, hair wooly, nose broad, face generally short, lips thick, and ears squarish and lobeless. Stature varies greatly, from pygmy to very tall. The most divergent group are the Khoisan (Bushman and Hottentot) peoples of Southern Africa''<ref>Race, Evolution, and Behavior by J. Phillipe Rushton, 1997, Transaction Publishers, pg 304</ref>


== Etymology ==
*According to philosphy professor ]:''Ordinary speakers acquainted with the out-of-Africa scenario are most charitably construed as intending 'Negroid' to denote individuals whose ancestors 15 to 5000 generations ago (with Harris & Hey, 1999, counting a generation as 20 years) were sub-Saharan African...Hybrid populations with multiple lines of descent are to be characterized in just those terms: as of multiple descent. Thus, American Negroids are individuals most of whose ancestors from 15 to 5000 generations ago were sub- Saharan African. Specifying 'most' more precisely in a way that captures ordinary usage may not be possible. '> 50%' seems too low a threshold; my sense is that ordinary attributions of race begin to stabilize at 75%.''<ref>Levin M. , ''Behavior and Philosophy'', 30, 21-42 (2002)</ref>
''Negroid'' has ] or ] and ] etymological roots. It literally translates as "black resemblance" from the Portuguese and Spanish word ''negro'' (]) from ] ''nigrum'', and Greek οειδές ''-oeidēs'', equivalent to ''-o-'' + είδες ''-eidēs'' "having the appearance of", derivative of είδος ''eîdos'' "appearance".<ref>{{cite book|title=The American Heritage guide to contemporary usage and style|publisher=Houghton Mifflin Company|year=2005|page=512|isbn=978-0-618-60499-9|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=xb6ie6PqYhwC|author1=Company, Houghton Mifflin}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/oid |title=Oid &#124; Define Oid at Dictionary.com |publisher=Dictionary.reference.com |access-date=2012-06-12}}</ref> The earliest recorded use of the term "Negroid" came in 1859.<ref>{{cite web| last = Harper| first = Douglas | title = Online Etymological Dictionary|date=November 2001| url = http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=negroid&searchmode=none| access-date = 2007-11-06}}</ref>


== History of the concept ==
=="Negroid" compared to "Black"==
=== Origins ===
]
], a scholar at the then modern ] developed a concept dividing mankind into five races in the revised 1795 edition of his ''De generis humani varietate nativa'' (''On the Natural Variety of Mankind''). Although Blumenbach's concept later gave rise to ], his arguments were basically anti-racist,<ref>{{cite journal |author=Bhopal R |title=The beautiful skull and Blumenbach's errors: the birth of the scientific concept of race |journal=BMJ |volume=335 |issue=7633 |pages=1308–1309 |date=December 2007 |pmid=18156242 |pmc=2151154 |doi=10.1136/bmj.39413.463958.80|quote=Blumenbach's name has been associated with scientific racism, but his arguments actually undermined racism. Blumenbach could not have foreseen the coming abuse of his ideas and classification in the 19th and (first half of the) 20th centuries.}}</ref> since he underlined that mankind as a whole forms one single ''species'',<ref>{{cite book |author=Johann Friedrich Blumenbach|title=Handbuch der Naturgeschichte|page=60|year=1797|quote=Es giebt nur eine Gattung (species) im Menschengeschlecht; und alle uns bekannte Völker aller Zeiten und aller Himmelsstriche können von einer gemeinschaftlichen Stammrasse abstammen. |url=http://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/book/view/blumenbach_naturgeschichte_1797?p=82|access-date=2020-05-24}}</ref> and points out that the transition from one race to another is so gradual that the distinctions between the races presented by him are "very arbitrary".<ref>German: "sehr willkürlich": {{cite book |author=Johann Friedrich Blumenbach|title=Handbuch der Naturgeschichte|page=61|year=1797|quote=Alle diese Verschiedenheiten fließen aber durch so mancherley Abstufungen und Uebergänge so unvermerkt zusammen, daß sich keine andre, als sehr willkürliche Grenzen zwischen ihnen festsetzen lassen. |url=http://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/book/view/blumenbach_naturgeschichte_1797?p=83|access-date=2020-05-24}}</ref> Blumenbach counts the inhabitants of North Africa among the "Caucasian race", grouping the other Africans as "Ethiopian race". In this context, he names the "]" and "]" as peoples through which the "Ethiopian race" gradually "flows together" with the "Caucasian race".<ref>German: "Aethiopische Rasse": {{cite book |author=Johann Friedrich Blumenbach|title=Handbuch der Naturgeschichte|page=62|year=1797|quote=Die Aethiopische Rasse: Abbild. n. h. Gegenst. tab. 5. mehr oder weniger schwarz; mit schwarzem krausem Haar; vorwärts prominirenden Kiefern, wulstigen Lippen, und stumpfer Nase. Dahin die übrigen Afrikaner, nahmentlich die Neger, die sich dann in die Habessinier, Mauren ꝛc. verlieren, so wie jede andre Menschen-Varietät mit ihren benachbarten Völkerschaften gleichsam zusammen fließt.|url=http://www.deutschestextarchiv.de/book/view/blumenbach_naturgeschichte_1797?p=84|access-date=2020-06-06}}</ref>
The term Negroid is a modified version of Negro which means black. As such, the terms Negroid and black are virtually synonymous. On Page 42 of the abridged version of "Race, Evolution, and Behavior" ] states: "In both everyday life and evolutionary biology, a 'Black' is anyone most of whose ancestors were born in sub-Saharan Africa"<ref></ref> while elsewhere Rushton writes "a Negroid is someone whose ancestors, between 4,000 and (to accommodate recent migrations) 20 generations ago, were born in sub-Saharan Africa.<ref name=Rushton/>


=== In the context of scientific racism ===
The U.S. census race definitions say a black is a person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. It includes people who indicate their race as "Black, African Am., or Negro," or provide written entries such as African American, Afro American, Kenyan, Nigerian, or Haitian. The Census Bureau however claims that these classifications are socio-political constructs and should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature<ref>]</ref>
==== Before Darwin ====
The development of Western race theories took place in a historical situation where most Western nations were still profiting from the enslavement of Africans<ref name="Sanders" />{{rp|524}} and therefore had an economical interest in portraying the inhabitants of ] as an inferior race. A significant change in Western views on Africans came about when ]'s ] drew attention to the impressive achievements of ], which could hardly be reconciled with the theory of Africans being inferior.<ref name="Sanders">{{Cite journal |last=Sanders |first=Edith R. |date=October 1969 |title=The Hamitic Hypothesis; Its Origin and Functions in Time Perspective |journal=The Journal of African History |language=en |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=521–532 |doi=10.1017/S0021853700009683 |issn=1469-5138 |jstor=179896|s2cid=162920355 }}</ref>{{rp|526–527}} In this context, many of the works published on Egypt after Napoleon's expedition "seemed to have had as their main purpose an attempt to prove in some way that the Egyptians were not Negroes",<ref name="Sanders" />{{rp|525}} but belonged to a "]", which was seen as a subgroup of the "Caucasian race". Thus the high civilization of Ancient Egypt could be separated from the allegedly inferior African "race".<ref name="Sanders" />{{rp|526}}
]


As historian Edith Sanders writes, "Perhaps because slavery was both still legal and profitable in the United States{{nbs}}... there arose an American school of anthropology which attempted to prove scientifically that the Egyptian was a Caucasian, far removed from the inferior Negro".<ref name="Sanders" />{{rp|526}} In his ''Crania Aegyptiaca'' (1844), ], the founder of anthropology in the United States, analyzed over a hundred intact crania gathered from the Nile Valley, and concluded that the ancient Egyptians were racially akin to Europeans.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Robinson|first1=Michael F.|title=The Lost White Tribe: Explorers, Scientists, and the Theory that Changed a Continent|date=2016|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-997850-2|pages=96–97|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SK-NCwAAQBAJ&pg=PT96|access-date=19 February 2017}}</ref>
==A craniofacial category==
{| class="wikitable" style="text-align:right; float:right; margin-right:60px"
!colspan=7 |Craniofacial Groups
|-
|]]]
||]]]
||]]]
|}


Discussions on race among Western scholars during the 19th century took place against the background of the debate between ] and ], the former arguing for a single origin of all mankind, the latter holding that each human race had a specific origin. Monogenists based their arguments either on a literal interpretation of the ] story of ] or on secular research. Since polygenism stressed the perceived differences, it was popular among ], especially ].<ref>Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning. The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, New York: Nation Books 2016. {{ISBN|978-1-5685-8464-5}}, chapters 4, 7–12, 14, 16 ''passim''.</ref>
Forensic anthropologists study the human skeleton in a legal setting, most often in criminal cases where the victim's remains are more or less skeletonized. A forensic anthropologist can also assist in the identification of deceased individuals whose remains are decomposed or otherwise unrecognizable. The adjective "forensic" refers to the application of this subfield of science to a court of law. Craniofacial anthropometry of a person's remains can help determine what the person looked like when alive. Also, due to the requirements of the ]{{Fact|date=February 2007}}, U.S. forensic practitioners are sometimes asked to classify remains into one of the U.S. socially-enforced endogamous groups: Black, White, or East Asian. In legal practice, these are sometimes termed, respectively, "Negroid," "Caucasoid," and "Mongoloid," or even the older "Caucasian," "Negro," and "Oriental." Nowadays, the terms "Black," "White," and "East Asian" are the more common usage.


Through ] conducted on thousands of human skulls, Morton argued that the differences between the races were too broad to have stemmed from a single common ancestor, but were instead consistent with separate racial origins.<ref>Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning. The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, New York: Nation Books 2016. {{ISBN|978-1-5685-8464-5}}, chapter 14.</ref> In ''Crania Aegyptiaca'', he reported his measurements of internal skull capacity grouped according to Blumenbach's five races, finding that the average capacity of the "Caucasian race" was at the top, and that "Ethiopian" skulls had the smallest capacity, with the other "races" ranging in between.<ref>Michael, John S. "A New Look at Morton's Craniological Research". Current Anthropology, vol. 29, no. 2, 1988, pp. 349–354. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2743412. Accessed 15 June 2020.</ref> He concluded that the "Ethiopian race" was inferior in terms of intelligence. Upon his death in 1851, when slavery still existed in the southern United States, the influential ''Charleston Medical Journal'' praised him with the words: "We of the South should consider him as our benefactor for aiding most materially in giving to the negro his true position as an inferior race."<ref>{{cite book |title=The Mismeasure of Man |author=Stephen Jay Gould |date=17 June 2006 |publisher=W. W. Norton & Company |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=RTjfmxTpsVsC&pg=PT64|isbn=978-0-393-31425-0|access-date=2020-06-11}} and by: {{cite web |url=https://www.penn.museum/sites/expedition/the-samuel-george-morton-cranial-collection/|title=The Samuel George Morton Cranial Collection. Historical Significance and New Research|author=Emily S. Renschler and Janet Monge|access-date=2020-06-11}}</ref> While a controversy about the correctness of Morton's measurements has been going on since the late 1970s, modern scientists agree that the volume of the skull and intelligence are not related.<ref>Mismeasure for mismeasure. Nature 474, 419 (2011). {{doi|10.1038/474419a}}</ref>
"]" are generalized to have the lowest degree of projection of the ] bones which contain the teeth, a notable size prominence of the cranium and forehead region, and a projection of the midfacial region. "]" traits are generalized to include more rounded eye sockets; broader, more rounded nasal cavity; a forward-slanting facial profile (]); and a ] skull (proportionally longer from front to back).


==== In the age of evolutionary biology ====
===Challenges===
{{MeyersLexikonEthnographicMap}}
]
]'s landmark work '']'', published in 1859, eight years after Morton's death, significantly changed scientific discourse on the origin of humans. British biologist ], a strong advocate of Darwinism and a monogenist, counted ten "modifications of mankind", dividing the native populations of ] into the "Bushmen" of the Cape region and the "Negroes" of the central areas of the continent.<ref>Huxley, T. H. (1870) ''Journal of the Ethnological Society of London''.</ref>


By the end of the 19th century, the influential German ], '']'', divided humanity into three major races called ''Caucasoid'', ''Mongoloid'', and ''Negroid'', each comprising various sub-races. While the "]" of northern Africa were seen as ''Caucasoid'', "]", "]", and "]" were seen as ''Negroid'' sub-races, although living outside the African continent. The only sub-races attributed to Africa were the "African Negroes" and the "]".<ref>The German legend of the map shows the following names: Hamiten, Australier, Melanesier, Negritos, Afrikanische Neger, Hottentotten.</ref>
Although it is categorization of a skull is clear given arbitrary parameters, it will not locate the owners geographic ancestry concretely all the time. While one's perception of an individual's ] can be affected by cultural aspects, the "race" of his skull is less ambiguous. As Dr. Stan Rhine put it, "...it is clear that race does mean different things to different people. In the context of forensic anthropology, the term race is unambiguous."<ref>http://medstat.med.utah.edu/kw/osteo/forensics/race.html.</ref> Although their craniofacial race based on skull indeces is unambiguous, it will not pin point their geographic origins accurately all the time due to variation in skulls within a geographic region. For example, racial categorization by craniofacial type will categorize some people from the ] (notably ], ], ], and ]) as having "Caucasoid" skulls, although],have caucasion features i;e nose,face,hair.], ], ], and ]) have silky smooth caucasoid hair. A region of the world historically defined as caucasoid.
While this method produces useful results for the population of the United States, it is likely that it would not be reliable for populations from other countries.<ref></ref> This is due to the fact that the United States has traditionally had groups whose ancestry came from geographically distant locations, and which have generally remained ] in this country, for social reasons. The craniofacial difference between Northern Europeans, West Africans, East Asians/Native Americans is quite pronounced and fall easily within the indeces used to determine race from skull type.{{Fact|date=February 2007}} As more immigrants from in between regions and as Americans become more racially mixed, such craniofacial identification is problematic.


The justification for ] ] was provided by ]<ref>Roy L. Brooks uses the adjective "scientific" inside quotation marks in his discussion of that entry and its connection with Jim Crow laws: Brooks, Roy L., editor. "Redress for Racism?" ''When Sorry Isn't Enough: The Controversy Over Apologies and Reparations for Human Injustice'', NYU Press, 1999, pp. 395–398. {{JSTOR|j.ctt9qg0xt.75}}. Accessed 17 Aug. 2020.</ref> opinions on "negro" psychology like those expressed by the entry for "Negro" in the ] (1910–1911):
Classification by craniofacial anthropometry does not necessarily coincide with genetic ancestry or social self-identification. For example, about one-third of so-called "White" Americans have detectable African DNA markers.<ref>Heather E. Collins-Schramm and others, "Markers that Discriminate Between European and African Ancestry Show Limited Variation Within Africa," ''Human Genetics'' 111 (2002): 566-9; Mark D. Shriver and others, "Skin Pigmentation, Biogeographical Ancestry, and Admixture Mapping," ''Human Genetics'' 112 (2003): 387-99.</ref> And about five percent of so-called "Black" Americans have no detectable "Negroid" traits at all, neither craniofacial nor in their DNA.<ref>E.J. Parra and others, "Ancestral Proportions and Admixture Dynamics in Geographically Defined African Americans Living in South Carolina," ''American Journal of Physical Anthropology'' 114 (2001): 18-29, Figure 1.</ref> In short, given three Americans, one who self-identifies and is socially accepted as U.S. White, another one who self-identifies and is socially accepted as U.S. Black, and one who self-identifies and is socially accepted as U.S. Hispanic, and given that they have precisely the same Afro-European mix of ancestries (one "mulatto" grandparent), there is quite literally no objective test that will identify their U.S. endogamous group membership without an interview.<ref>Carol Channing, ''Just Lucky I Guess: A Memoir of Sorts'' (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2002); Gregory Howard Williams, ''Life on the Color Line: The True Story of a White Boy who Discovered he was Black'' (New York: Dutton, 1995)</ref> In practice, the application of such forensic criteria ultimately comes down to whether the skull "looks Negroid," "Caucasoid," or "Mongoloid" in the eye of each U.S. forensic practitioner.
{{quote|"Mentally the negro is inferior to the white{{nbs}}... the arrest or even deterioration of mental development is no doubt very largely {{not a typo|due to the fact that}} after puberty sexual matters take the first place in the negro's life and thoughts.{{nbs}}... the mental constitution of the negro is very similar to that of a child, normally good-natured and cheerful, but subject to sudden fits of emotion and passion during which he is capable of performing acts of singular atrocity, impressionable, vain, but often exhibiting in the capacity of servant a dog-like fidelity which has stood the supreme test."<ref name="EB1911">{{cite EB1911 |wstitle=Negro |volume=11|pages = 344&ndash;349; see page 344 |author-link=Thomas Athol Joyce |last=Joyce |first=Thomas Athol}}</ref>}}


==== Franz Boas and ''The Race Question'' ====
==A genetic category?==
Since the 1920s, ] and his school of anthropology at ] were criticising the concept of race as politically dangerous and scientifically useless because of its vague definition.<ref name="ways" />{{rp|248}}] and ]]]
Racial psychologist ] set out to discover whether it was logical to merge the diverse ethnic groups of sub-Saharan Africa into a broad negroid race distinguishable from other broad races and concluded that it was:


In 1950, ] published their statement '']''. It condemned all forms of ], naming "the doctrine of ''inequality'' of men and races"<ref name="UNESCO1950">, UNESCO, 1950, 11pp</ref>{{rp|1}} among the causes of ] and proposing to replace the term "race" with "ethnic groups" because "serious errors{{nbs}}... are habitually committed when the term "race" is used in popular parlance."<ref name="UNESCO1950" />
]


==== Carleton Coon ====
On pgs 430-431 of ''the g factor'' Jensen makes reference to the chart to the right, writing:
American anthropologist ] published his much debated<ref name="ways">{{cite journal| last = Jackson Jr.| first = John| title="In Ways Unacademical": The Reception of Carleton S. Coon's The Origin of Races| journal = Journal of the History of Biology| volume = 34| issue = 2| pages = 247–285|date=June 2001| doi = 10.1023/A:1010366015968 | jstor=4331661| s2cid = 86739986}}</ref>{{rp|248}} ''Origin of Races'' in 1962. Coon divided the species '']'' into five groups: Besides the ''Caucasoid'', ''Mongoloid'', and '']'' races, he posited two races among the indigenous populations of sub-Saharan Africa: the '']'' in the south, and the ''Congoid race''.<ref>{{cite book|author=Carleton S. Coon|title=The Origin of Races|year=1962|pages=3–4|quote= comprises the Negroes and Pygmies of Africa. I have named it Congoid after the region (not a specific nation) which contains both kinds of people. The term ''Negroid'' has been deliberately omitted to avoid confusion. It has been applied both to Africans and the spiral-haired peoples of Southern Asia and Oceania who are not genetically related to each other, as far as we know.}}</ref> In 1982, he used ''Negroid'' and ''Congoid'' as synonyms.<ref>{{Cite book | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=DwGBAAAAMAAJ&q=congoid | title=Racial adaptations| isbn=978-0-8304-1012-5| last1=Coon| first1=Carleton S.| year=1982|page=11| publisher=Nelson-Hall|quote=The five primary races are the Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Australoid, Congoid (more commonly called Negroid), and the Capoid}}</ref>


Coon's thesis was that '']'' had already been divided into five different races or subspecies. "''Homo Erectus'' then evolved into ''Homo Sapiens'' not once but five times, as each subspecies, living in its own territory, passed a critical threshold from a more brutal to a more ''sapient'' state."<ref>Cited according to {{cite journal| last = Jackson Jr.| first = John| title="In Ways Unacademical": The Reception of Carleton S. Coon's The Origin of Races| journal = Journal of the History of Biology| volume = 34| issue = 2| page = 248|date=June 2001| doi = 10.1023/A:1010366015968 | jstor=4331661| s2cid = 86739986}} The reference given there is to "Coon, ''Origin of the'' ''Races'', 1963 , p. 657".</ref> He thought the ''Caucasoid'' race had passed the threshold to ''Homo sapiens'' about 200,000 years earlier than the ''Negroid'' race,<ref name="ways" />{{rp|248}} thus giving ] in the southern US the opportunity to make political use of his thesis in their fight against the ].<ref name="ways" />{{rp|249}} Although Coon publicly assumed a neutral stance regarding segregation, some fellow anthropologists accused him of being racist because of his "clear insensitivity to social issues".<ref name="ways" />{{rp|249}} In private conversations and correspondence with his cousin ], a prominent supporter of ], he went much further, helping Putnam "hone his arguments against integration".<ref name="ways" />{{rp|256}}
:''Cavalli-Sforza et al. transformed the distance matrix to a correlation matrix consisting of 861 correlation coefficients among the forty-two populations, so they could apply principal components (PC) analysis on their genetic data...PC analysis is a wholly objective mathematical procedure. It requires no decisions or judgments on anyone's part and yields identical results for everyone who does the calculations correctly...The important point is that if various populations were fairly homogeneous in genetic composition, differing no more genetically than could be attributable only to random variation, a PC analysis would not be able to cluster the populations into a number of groups according to their genetic propinquity. In fact, a PC analysis shows that most of the forty-two populations fall very distinctly into the quadrants formed by using the first and second principal component as axes...They form quite widely separated clusters of the various populations that resemble the "classic" major racial groups-Caucasoids in the upper right, Negroids in the lower right, North East Asians in the upper left, and South East Asians (including South Chinese) and Pacific Islanders in the lower left...I have tried other objective methods of clustering on the same data (varimax rotation of the principal components, common factor analysis, and hierarchical cluster analysis). All of these types of analysis yield essentially the same picture and identify the same major racial groupings.'' To test the reliability of these broadgroupings, Jensen performed his own independent varimax rotated principal component analysis described on paged 518 of the g factor:


Coon's evolutionary approach was criticized on the basis that such sorting criteria generally do not produce meaningful results, and that evolutionary divergence was extremely improbable over the given time-frames.<ref>{{cite journal| last1 = Carlson| first1 = David| last2 = Armelagos| first2 = George | title = Problems in Racial Geography| journal = Annals of the Association of American Geographers| volume = 61| issue = 3| pages = 630–633|date=September 1971 | doi = 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1971.tb00812.x }}</ref> Monatagu (1963) argued that Coon's theory on the speciation of Congoids and other ''Homo sapiens'' was unlikely because the transmutation of one species to another was a markedly gradual process.<ref>{{cite journal| last = Dobzhansky| first = Theodosius |author2=Ashley Montagu |author3=C. S. Coon| title = Two Views of Coon's "Origin of Races" with Comments by Coon and Replies| journal = Current Anthropology| volume = 4| issue = 4| pages = 360–367| doi = 10.1086/200401| year = 1963| s2cid = 145245427 }}</ref>
''I have used a somewhat different collection of only 26 populations from around the world that were studied by the population genetecists Nei & Roychoudhury (1993), whose article provides the genetic distance matrix among the 26 population samples, based on 29 polymorphic genes with 121 alleles...The population clusters are defined by their largest loadings (shown in boldface type) on one of the components. A population's proximity to the central tendency of a cluster is related to the size of its loading in that cluster. Note that some groups have major and minor loadings on different components, which represent not discrete categories, but central tendencies...The genetic groupings are clearly similar to those obtained by Cavali-Sforza et al. using other methods applied to other samples.''


Since Coon followed the traditional methods of physical anthropology, relying on morphological characteristics, and not on the emerging ] to classify humans, the debate over ''Origin of Races'' has been "viewed as the last gasp of an outdated scientific methodology that was soon to be supplanted".<ref name="ways" />{{rp|249}}
{| class="wikitable" style="margin: 1em auto 1em auto"
|+ Jensen's 1998 varimax rotated Principal component analysis of Nei & Roychoudhury's 1993 genetic data. The analysis yielded 6 components, 3 of which Jensen labeled using racial nomenclature<ref>The g factor by Aurthu Jensen, pg 518-519</ref>
! Population !! Mongoloids !! Caucasoids !! South Asians & Pacific Islanders !! Negroids !! North & South Amerindindians & Eskimos !! aboriginal Australians & Papuan New Guineans
|-
! Pygmy
| || ||||651||||
|-
! Nigerian
| || || ||'''734'''||||
|-
! Bantu
| || || || '''747'''|| ||
|-
! San (Bushmen)
| || || || 465 || ||
|-
! Lapp
| || 500 || || || ||
|-
! Finn
| || '''988''' || || || ||
|-
! German
| || '''978''' || || || ||
|-
! English
| || '''948''' || || || ||
|-
! Italian
| || '''989''' || || || ||
|-
! Iranian
| || 635 || || || ||
|-
!Northern Indian
| || '''704''' || || || ||
|-
!Japanese
|'''916'''|| ||214 || || ||
|-
! Korean
|'''959'''|| || 229|| || || ||
|-
! Tibetan
| '''855''' || || || || || ||
|-
! Mongolian
| '''842''' || || 357|| || || ||
|-
! Southern Chinese
| 331 || || '''771'''|| || || ||
|-
! Thai
| || ||'''814'''|| || || ||
|-
! Filipino
| || ||'''782'''|| || || ||
|-
! Indonesian
| || || '''749''' || || || ||
|-
!Polynesian
| || || 526 || || || 284
|-
!Micronesian
| || || 521 || || ||328
|-
! Australian (aborigines)
| || || || || || '''706'''
|-
! Papuan (New Guineans)
| || || || || ||'''742'''
|-
! North Amerindian
| || || || || '''804''' ||
|-
! South Amerindian
| || || || || 563 ||
|-
! Eskimo
| || || || || '''726''' ||
|}


=== Cheikh Anta Diop and "Negroid" primacy ===
]
] author ] contrasted "Negroid" with "Cro-Magnoid" in his publications arguing for "Negroid" primacy. ], Upper Paleolithic fossils found in Italy in 1901, had been classified as Negroid by Boule and Vallois (1921). The identification was obsolete by the 1960s, but was controversially revived by Diop in his work, "The African Origin of Civilizations" in 1974<ref>{{cite book |last1=Diop |first1=Cheikh Anta |title=The African origin of civilization: myth or reality |date=1974 |publisher=L. Hill |location=New York |isbn=1-55652-072-7 |page=266 |edition=1st}}</ref> and republished in 1989.<ref name="Masset">Masset, C. (1989): , Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, vol. 86, n° 8, pp. 228–243. "Cornevin seems to ignore the depth of morphological differences that exist between the Black and the White when he dates these differences back to Antiquity as recent as the eleventh millennium B.C. By doing so he opposes the one hypothesis at the disposal of scholars to confer upon the Whites an antiquity equal to that of the Blacks. He errs most regrettably in claiming that the Asselar man looks more like the Cro-Magnoid European of Grimladi and the Bushman than like modern Blacks. By definition, the Grimaldi Negorid is not Cro-Magnoid, and he is the only one the Asselar man could possibly resemble; he shares no feature with the so-called Cro-Magnon man who lived later in the same cave and is the prototype of the White race as the 'Negroid' is the prototype of the Black race." C. A. Diop, ''The African Origin of Civilization: Myth Or Reality'' (1989), p. 266.</ref>
Jensen is not alone in concluding that sub-Saharan Africans form a distinguishable genetic cluster. Noah A. Rosenberg and Jonathan K. Pritchard, geneticists from the laboratory of Marcus W. Feldman of Stanford University, assayed approximately 375 polymorphisms called short tandem repeats in more than 1,000 people from 52 ethnic groups in Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas. They looked at the varying frequencies of these polymorphisms, and were able to distinguish five different groups of people whose ancestors were typically isolated by oceans, deserts or mountains: sub-Saharan Africans; Europeans and Asians west of the Himalayas; East Asians (who Blumenbach called the yellow race); inhabitants of New Guinea and Melanesia; and Native Americans.<ref>]</ref> A similar finding was made by Dr. ] of Stanford University. According to the ]:
<blockquote>These five geographically isolated groups, in Dr. Risch's description, are sub-Saharan Africans; Caucasians, including people from Europe, the Indian subcontinent and the Middle East; Asians, including people from China, Japan, the Philippines and Siberia; Pacific Islanders; and Native Americans.<ref>]</ref></blockquote>


== Physical features ==
===Challenges===
=== General appearance ===
Although Jensen used the work of Cavalli-Sforza to assert a negroid race in terms of modern genetics, Cavalli-Sforza, himself, has said, "the idea of race in the human species serves no purpose" and that his research is "expected to undermine the popular belief that there are ''clearly defined'' races, to contribute to the elimination of racism". He has also said,
The ] (1910–1911), lists the following "well-defined characteristics" of the "Negroid" populations of Africa, southern ], ], and ]: "A dark skin, varying from dark brown, reddish-brown, or chocolate to nearly black; dark, tightly curled hair, flat in traverse section, of the woolly or the frizzly type; a greater or less tendency to ]; eyes dark brown with yellowish ]; nose more or less broad and flat; and large teeth".<ref name="EB1911"/> The ''Encyclopædia Britannica'' sees a tendency towards a "tall stature" and "]" (long-headedness), with the exception of the ] who are described as showing "short stature" and "]" (short-headedness).<ref name="EB1911"/>
{{cquote|The classification into races has proved to be a futile exercise for reasons that were already clear to Darwin. Human races are still extremely unstable entities in the hands of modern taxonomists, who define from 3 to 60 more races. To some extent, this latitude depends on the personal preference of taxonomists, who may choose to be 'lumpers' or 'splitters'. Although there is no doubt that there is only one human species, there are clearly no objective reasons for stopping at any particular level of taxonomic splitting. In fact, the analysis we carry out..for the purposes of evolutionary study shows that the level at which we stop our classification is completely arbitrary." (Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi, and Piazza, 1994, p. 19).}}


] writing around the turn of the millennium described "Negroid"<ref>A critical reflection on the use of "Negroid" and related terms in this context is given by: {{cite journal |last1=Diana Smay, George Armelagos |title=Galileo wept: A critical assessment of the use of race of forensic anthropolopy |journal=Transforming Anthropology |date=2000 |volume=9 |issue=2 |pages=22–24 |url=http://www.anthropology.emory.edu/FACULTY/ANTGA/Web%20Site/PDFs/Galileo%20Wept-%20A%20Critical%20Assessment%20of%20the%20Use%20of%20Race%20in%20Forensic%20Anthropology.pdf |access-date=13 July 2016 |doi=10.1525/tran.2000.9.2.19 |s2cid=143942539 |archive-date=18 August 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180818073338/http://www.anthropology.emory.edu/FACULTY/ANTGA/Web%20Site/PDFs/Galileo%20Wept-%20A%20Critical%20Assessment%20of%20the%20Use%20of%20Race%20in%20Forensic%20Anthropology.pdf }}</ref> skulls as having a broad and round ]; no dam or nasal sill; ]-shaped ]s; notable facial projection in the jaw and mouth area (]); a rectangular-shaped ]; a square or rectangular ] shape;<ref>{{cite book |editor=George W. Gill |editor2=Stanley Rhine |title=Skeletal Attribution of Race: Methods for Forensic Anthropology|date=1990|publisher=Maxwell Museum of Anthropology|isbn=978-0-912535-06-7|oclc=671604288}}</ref> a large interorbital distance; a more undulating ];<ref name=Wilkinson>{{cite book|last1=Wilkinson|first1=Caroline|title=Forensic Facial Reconstruction|date=2004|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=978-0-521-82003-5|pages=84–85|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=NKWm9Q0vbT4C|access-date=2 June 2015}}</ref> and large teeth.<ref name=Brace1993>Brace CL, Tracer DP, Yaroch LA, Robb J, Brandt K, Nelson AR, , (1993), Yrbk Phys Anthropol 36:1–31, p.18</ref>
Additionally, according to an article published in The Economist, the work of Cavalli-Sforza "challenges the assumption that there are significant genetic differences between human races, and indeed, the idea that 'race' has any useful biological meaning at all." (The Human Genome Survey, ] 2000, pg. 11)


=== Neoteny ===
] lists "] structural traits in which{{nbs}}... Negroids differ from Caucasoids{{nbs}}... flattish nose, flat root of the nose, narrower ears, narrower joints, frontal skull eminences, later closure of ]ry ], less hairy, longer eyelashes, ] pattern of second and third molars."<ref name=Montagu2>Montagu, Ashley <u>Growing Young</u> Published by Greenwood Publishing Group, 1988 {{ISBN|0-89789-166-X}}</ref>{{rp|254}} He also suggested that in the extinct Negroid group termed the "]", pedomorphic traits proceeded further than in other Negroids.<ref name=Montagu2 /> Additionally, Montagu wrote that the Boskopoids had larger brains than modern humans (1,700 cubic centimeters cranial capacity compared to 1,400 cubic centimeters in modern-day humans), and the projection of their mouth was less than in other Negroids.<ref name=Montagu2 /> He believed the Boskopoids were the ancestors of the ].<ref name=Montagu2 />


=== Athleticism ===
Cavalli-Sforza has been challenged by several scholars (Keita and Kittles (1997/1999), Armelagos (2001) et al.) for using pre-defined, arbitrary categories to cluster or assign various populations. Typical of this is Cavalli-Sforza's ] grouping. This research it is held, often publicly disavows the importance of race, but in practice still uses older racial categories and methodologies that downplay the diversity of the Negroid peoples. <ref>The Persistence of Racial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence, S. O. Y. Keita, Rick A. Kittles, American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 99, No. 3 (Sep., 1997), pp. 534-544</ref>
In the context of prominent successes of African-American athletes like ] during the ], the speed advantage of the "Negroid type of calf, foot and heel bone" was discussed.<ref name="JoSport">{{cite journal|last=Wiggins|first=David K.|title="Great Speed But Little Stamina:" The Historical Debate Over Black Athletic Superiority|journal=Journal of Sport History|volume=16|issue=2|year=1989|pages=158–185|s2cid=27097059|url=http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/00b2/26c22a8220772dd4d286b79e0d457418d35f.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190216032859/http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/00b2/26c22a8220772dd4d286b79e0d457418d35f.pdf|archive-date=2019-02-16}}</ref>{{rp|161}}<ref name="Kendi">Cited in: Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning. The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, New York: Nation Books 2016. {{ISBN|978-1-5685-8464-5}}, chapter 27.</ref> Black Anthropologist ] joined the debate in the same year, pointing out that "there is not a single physical characteristic, including skin color, which all the Negro stars have in common which definitely classify them as Negroes."<ref name="Kendi" /><ref name="JoSport" /> Today, suggestions of biological differences in athletic ability between racial groups are considered unscientific.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Saini|first=Angela|date=23 July 2019|title=Sports and IQ: the persistence of race 'science' in competition|journal=Nature|volume=571|issue=7766|pages=474–475|doi=10.1038/d41586-019-02244-w|bibcode=2019Natur.571..474S|s2cid=198191524|doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|last=Wiggins|first=David K.|title=More Than a Game: A History of the African American Experience in Sport|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield|year=2018|isbn=978-1-5381-1498-8|page=151}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=2003|title=Interview with Robert Graves Jr.|url=https://www.pbs.org/race/000_About/002_04-background-01-06.htm|website=PBS.org}}</ref>


== Criticism ==
The methodology in use, critics maintain, is to establish narrow race clusters in advance, and then data is sorted as much as possible into these pre-defined categories, rather than let the data speak for themselves. <ref>Rick Kitties, and S. O. Y. Keita, "Interpreting African Genetic Diversity", African Archaeological Review, Vol. 16, No. 2,1999, p. 1-5</ref>. When pre-sorting is not used, widely varyiing results appear than those obtained by Jensen, et al. Critics hold that scholars like Jensen, Riesch, Cavalli-Sforza et all too often rely on a stereotypical conception of a "true negro" - identified and defined as narrowly as possible somewhere south of the Sahara, but no similar attempt is made to define a "true white". (Brown and Armelagos 2001) Under the "true negro" approach, all else not meeting the narrow, stereotypical classification is attributed to mixture with outside sources, or split off and assigned to "Caucasoid" clusters. Ethiopians and Somalians for example are split off and assigned to "Caucusoid" or "mixed" groups. <ref>Apportionment of Racial Diversity: A Review, Ryan A. Brown and George J. Armelagos, 2001, Evolutionary Anthropology, 10:34-40)</ref>
{{Black people sidebar}}


The '']'' states: "The term Negroid belongs to a set of terms introduced by 19th-century anthropologists attempting to categorize human races. Such terms are associated with outdated notions of racial types, and so are now potentially offensive and best avoided."<ref name="oxford">{{cite book|isbn=978-0-19-957112-3|title=Oxford Dictionary of English|year=2010|last1=Stevenson|first1=Angus|publisher=OUP Oxford }} As of 2020, the same text was still present on the website: {{cite web| title = Ask Oxford – Definition of Negroid| publisher = Oxford Dictionary of English| year = 2020| url = https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/negroid| access-date = 2020-08-05| archive-date = 2018-06-30| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20180630213914/https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/negroid| url-status = dead}}</ref>
As an example of what they see to be flawed methodology, some writers cite Cavalli-Sforza's advocacy of defining "core populations" (discrete, less admixed groupings, i.e. "races) and their evolution and migration. Followers of this approach (Horai 1995) use DNA analysis to postulate racial divergence times, when discrete populations supposedly began to from "core" peoples into spreading populations throughout Africa, Europe, Asia and elsewhere. As regards Africa, the entire mtDNA sequence was applied to the core groups or populations to determine such divergences. Samples used in measurement were (a) 10 individuals from Japan, whose gene data was amalgamated into a consensus to represent Asians, (b) a cluster of broad-based Europeanized data called the Cambridge sequence, and (c) one African individual from Uganda who was used to represent all African peoples. On this basis, entire geographic regions were conceptualized as authentic.<ref>The Persistence of Racial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence, S. O. Y. Keita, Rick A. Kittles, American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 99, No. 3 (Sep., 1997), pp. 534-544</ref> Some writers posit another alternative to human variability distinct from Cavalli-Sforza's core population concept. This is based on the ], of all modern humanity emanating from Africa.


=== Criticism based on modern genetics ===
The notion of "mixed" groups coming into play simply because Negroes show a variation in features, such as aquiline noses, lighter skin color or wavy hair has also been challenged as arbitrary, stereotypical, and inconsistent with how data form other non-African groups is handled. Scholars mapping human genes using modern DNA analysis, show that most of human genetic variation (some 85-90%) occurs within localized population groups, and that race only can account for 6-10% of the variation. Arbitrarily classifying Masai, Ethiopians, Egyptians, Shillouk, Nubians, etc., as "Caucasian" is thus problematic, since all these peoples are northeast African populations and show normal variation well within the 85-90% specified by DNA analysis.<ref>Patterns of Human Diversity, within and among Continents, Inferred from Biallelic DNA Polymorphisms, Barbujani, et al, (Geonome Research, Vol. 12, Issue 4, pp. 602-612), April 2002</ref>
{{See also|Race and genetics}}


In his 2016 essay ''Evolution and Notions of Human Race'', ] discusses various criteria used in biology to define subspecies or races. His examples for traits traditionally considered to be racial include skin colour: "he native peoples with the darkest skins live in tropical Africa and ]." While those two groups would traditionally be classified as "black", in reality Africans are more closely related to Europeans than to Melanesians.<ref name="Templeton2016" />{{rp|359}} Another example is ], which is often found in African populations, but also in "many European and Asian populations".<ref name="Templeton2016" />{{rp|359}}
Modern physical anthropologists (Liberman and Jackson 1995) also question splitting of peoples into racial zones, holding that such splitting represents selective grouping of samples.<ref>Leiberman and Jackson 1995 "Race and Three Models of Human Origins" in American Anthropologist 97(2) pp. 231-242</ref> Keita and Kittles (1999) for example, argue that modern DNA analysis points to the need for more emphasis on clinal variation and gradations that are more than adequate to explain differences between peoples rather than pre-conceived racial clusters. Variation in how Negroes appear need not be the result of a "mix" from some outside source, but may be simply a contiuum of peoples in that region from skin color, to facial features, to hair, to height. The present of aquiline features for example, may not be necessarily a result of race mixture with Caucasoids, but simply another local population variant in situ. Scholars such as Alan Templeton have also challenged the notion of mixed populations, holding that race as a biological concept is dubious and that only a minor percentage of human variability can be accounted for by distinct "races." They argue that modern DNA analysis presents a more accurate alternative, that of simply local population variants, gradations or continuums in human difference like skin color or facial shape or hair, rather than rigid categories. <ref>Human Races: A Genetic and Evolutionary Perspective, Alan R. Templeton. American Anthropologist, 1998, 100:632-650; The Persistence of Racial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence, S. O. Y. Keita, Rick A. Kittles, American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 99, No. 3 (Sep., 1997), pp. 534-544</ref>


Templeton concludes: "he answer to the question whether races exist in humans is clear and unambiguous: no."<ref name="Templeton2016">Templeton, A. (2016). EVOLUTION AND NOTIONS OF HUMAN RACE. In Losos J. & Lenski R. (Eds.), ''How Evolution Shapes Our Lives: Essays on Biology and Society'' (pp. 346–361). Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press. {{doi|10.2307/j.ctv7h0s6j.26}}. That this view reflects the consensus among American anthropologists is stated in: {{cite journal|last2=Yu|first2=Joon-Ho|last3=Ifekwunigwe|first3=Jayne O.|last4=Harrell|first4=Tanya M.|last5=Bamshad|first5=Michael J.|last6=Royal|first6=Charmaine D.|date=February 2017|title=Anthropologists' views on race, ancestry, and genetics|journal=American Journal of Physical Anthropology|volume=162|issue=2|pages=318–327|doi=10.1002/ajpa.23120|pmid=27874171|last1=Wagner|first1=Jennifer K.|pmc=5299519}} See also: {{cite web|author=American Association of Physical Anthropologists|author-link=American Association of Physical Anthropologists|title=AAPA Statement on Race and Racism |website=American Association of Physical Anthropologists|access-date=19 June 2020 |date=27 March 2019 |url=https://physanth.org/about/position-statements/aapa-statement-race-and-racism-2019/}}</ref>{{rp|360}}
Critics of how Negroes are classified also point to contradictory results in the clustering methods of Jensen, Cavalli-Sforza et al. An example of contradictory results are seen in the work of such researches as Bowcock, Sforza, et. al, 1994.
:"Despite a research design that should have maximized the degree to which the researchers were able to classify individuals by racial category, the results are something less than "high resolution" with respect to this goal. For example, 88% of individuals were classified as coming from the right continent, while only 46% were classified as coming from the right region within each continent. Notably, 0% success was achieved in classifying East Asian populations to their region or origin. These results occurred despite the fact that Bowcock and co-workers entered their genetic information into a program that already used the a priori racial categories they were trying to replicate."<ref>Armelagos and Brown, op. cit. Apportionment of Racial Diversity.. op. cit.</ref>


== Further reading ==
* ], '']'', New York: Nation Books 2016. {{ISBN|978-1-5685-8464-5}}


== References ==
In sum, several scholars call for Negroid populations or those traditionally identified as Negroid to be handled in the same manner as non-Negro populations, without stereotypical pre-definitions, or arbitrary splitting and clustering. This approach also challenges those scholars who claim to find organic Negroid populations types in all continents- from Australia to India (See ] and ]) although the ] argues for a common African origin for modern humanity. <ref>Keita and Kittle, op.cit</ref>
{{Reflist}}


{{Historical definitions of race}}
==References==

<div class="references-small">
]
<references/>
]
</div>
]

]
]

Latest revision as of 06:29, 17 December 2024

Outdated grouping of human beings

Negroid (less commonly called Congoid) is an obsolete racial grouping of various people indigenous to Africa south of the area which stretched from the southern Sahara desert in the west to the African Great Lakes in the southeast, but also to isolated parts of South and Southeast Asia (Negritos). The term is derived from now-disproven conceptions of race as a biological category.

The concept of dividing humans into three races called Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid (originally named "Ethiopian") was introduced in the 1780s by members of the Göttingen school of history and further developed by Western scholars in the context of "racist ideologies" during the age of colonialism.

With the rise of modern genetics, the concept of distinct human races in a biological sense has become obsolete. In 2019, the American Association of Biological Anthropologists stated: "Race does not provide an accurate representation of human biological variation. It was never accurate in the past, and it remains inaccurate when referencing contemporary human populations."

Etymology

Negroid has Portuguese or Spanish and Ancient Greek etymological roots. It literally translates as "black resemblance" from the Portuguese and Spanish word negro (black) from Latin nigrum, and Greek οειδές -oeidēs, equivalent to -o- + είδες -eidēs "having the appearance of", derivative of είδος eîdos "appearance". The earliest recorded use of the term "Negroid" came in 1859.

History of the concept

Origins

Johann Friedrich Blumenbach, a scholar at the then modern Göttingen University developed a concept dividing mankind into five races in the revised 1795 edition of his De generis humani varietate nativa (On the Natural Variety of Mankind). Although Blumenbach's concept later gave rise to scientific racism, his arguments were basically anti-racist, since he underlined that mankind as a whole forms one single species, and points out that the transition from one race to another is so gradual that the distinctions between the races presented by him are "very arbitrary". Blumenbach counts the inhabitants of North Africa among the "Caucasian race", grouping the other Africans as "Ethiopian race". In this context, he names the "Abyssinians" and "Moors" as peoples through which the "Ethiopian race" gradually "flows together" with the "Caucasian race".

In the context of scientific racism

Before Darwin

The development of Western race theories took place in a historical situation where most Western nations were still profiting from the enslavement of Africans and therefore had an economical interest in portraying the inhabitants of sub-Saharan Africa as an inferior race. A significant change in Western views on Africans came about when Napoleon's 1798 invasion of Egypt drew attention to the impressive achievements of Ancient Egypt, which could hardly be reconciled with the theory of Africans being inferior. In this context, many of the works published on Egypt after Napoleon's expedition "seemed to have had as their main purpose an attempt to prove in some way that the Egyptians were not Negroes", but belonged to a "Hamitic race", which was seen as a subgroup of the "Caucasian race". Thus the high civilization of Ancient Egypt could be separated from the allegedly inferior African "race".

Illustration of Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid skulls shown from above (Samuel George Morton, 1839)

As historian Edith Sanders writes, "Perhaps because slavery was both still legal and profitable in the United States ... there arose an American school of anthropology which attempted to prove scientifically that the Egyptian was a Caucasian, far removed from the inferior Negro". In his Crania Aegyptiaca (1844), Samuel George Morton, the founder of anthropology in the United States, analyzed over a hundred intact crania gathered from the Nile Valley, and concluded that the ancient Egyptians were racially akin to Europeans.

Discussions on race among Western scholars during the 19th century took place against the background of the debate between monogenists and polygenists, the former arguing for a single origin of all mankind, the latter holding that each human race had a specific origin. Monogenists based their arguments either on a literal interpretation of the biblical story of Adam and Eve or on secular research. Since polygenism stressed the perceived differences, it was popular among white supremacists, especially slaveholders in the US.

Through craniometry conducted on thousands of human skulls, Morton argued that the differences between the races were too broad to have stemmed from a single common ancestor, but were instead consistent with separate racial origins. In Crania Aegyptiaca, he reported his measurements of internal skull capacity grouped according to Blumenbach's five races, finding that the average capacity of the "Caucasian race" was at the top, and that "Ethiopian" skulls had the smallest capacity, with the other "races" ranging in between. He concluded that the "Ethiopian race" was inferior in terms of intelligence. Upon his death in 1851, when slavery still existed in the southern United States, the influential Charleston Medical Journal praised him with the words: "We of the South should consider him as our benefactor for aiding most materially in giving to the negro his true position as an inferior race." While a controversy about the correctness of Morton's measurements has been going on since the late 1970s, modern scientists agree that the volume of the skull and intelligence are not related.

In the age of evolutionary biology

Meyers Konversations-Lexikon (1885–1890) ethnographic map
Caucasoid:  Aryans  Semitic  Hamitic
Negroid:  African Negro  Khoikhoi  Melanesian  Negrito  Australoid
Uncertain:  Dravida & Sinhalese
Mongoloid:  North Mongol  Chinese & Indochinese  Korean & Japanese  Tibetan & Burmese  Malay  Polynesian  Maori  Micronesian  Eskimo & Inuit  American

Darwin's landmark work On the Origin of Species, published in 1859, eight years after Morton's death, significantly changed scientific discourse on the origin of humans. British biologist Thomas Huxley, a strong advocate of Darwinism and a monogenist, counted ten "modifications of mankind", dividing the native populations of sub-Saharan Africa into the "Bushmen" of the Cape region and the "Negroes" of the central areas of the continent.

By the end of the 19th century, the influential German encyclopaedia, Meyers Konversations-Lexikon, divided humanity into three major races called Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid, each comprising various sub-races. While the "Hamites" of northern Africa were seen as Caucasoid, "Australians", "Melanesians", and "Negritoes" were seen as Negroid sub-races, although living outside the African continent. The only sub-races attributed to Africa were the "African Negroes" and the "Hottentots".

The justification for racist Jim Crow laws was provided by pseudo-scientific opinions on "negro" psychology like those expressed by the entry for "Negro" in the Encyclopædia Britannica, 11th edition (1910–1911):

"Mentally the negro is inferior to the white ... the arrest or even deterioration of mental development is no doubt very largely due to the fact that after puberty sexual matters take the first place in the negro's life and thoughts. ... the mental constitution of the negro is very similar to that of a child, normally good-natured and cheerful, but subject to sudden fits of emotion and passion during which he is capable of performing acts of singular atrocity, impressionable, vain, but often exhibiting in the capacity of servant a dog-like fidelity which has stood the supreme test."

Franz Boas and The Race Question

Since the 1920s, Franz Boas and his school of anthropology at Columbia University were criticising the concept of race as politically dangerous and scientifically useless because of its vague definition.

Illustrations of "racial types" from The New Student's Reference Work (1914), edited by Chandler B. Beach and Frank Morton McMurry

In 1950, UNESCO published their statement The Race Question. It condemned all forms of racism, naming "the doctrine of inequality of men and races" among the causes of World War II and proposing to replace the term "race" with "ethnic groups" because "serious errors ... are habitually committed when the term "race" is used in popular parlance."

Carleton Coon

American anthropologist Carleton S. Coon published his much debated Origin of Races in 1962. Coon divided the species Homo sapiens into five groups: Besides the Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Australoid races, he posited two races among the indigenous populations of sub-Saharan Africa: the Capoid race in the south, and the Congoid race. In 1982, he used Negroid and Congoid as synonyms.

Coon's thesis was that Homo erectus had already been divided into five different races or subspecies. "Homo Erectus then evolved into Homo Sapiens not once but five times, as each subspecies, living in its own territory, passed a critical threshold from a more brutal to a more sapient state." He thought the Caucasoid race had passed the threshold to Homo sapiens about 200,000 years earlier than the Negroid race, thus giving segregationists in the southern US the opportunity to make political use of his thesis in their fight against the civil rights movement. Although Coon publicly assumed a neutral stance regarding segregation, some fellow anthropologists accused him of being racist because of his "clear insensitivity to social issues". In private conversations and correspondence with his cousin Carleton Putnam, a prominent supporter of white supremacy, he went much further, helping Putnam "hone his arguments against integration".

Coon's evolutionary approach was criticized on the basis that such sorting criteria generally do not produce meaningful results, and that evolutionary divergence was extremely improbable over the given time-frames. Monatagu (1963) argued that Coon's theory on the speciation of Congoids and other Homo sapiens was unlikely because the transmutation of one species to another was a markedly gradual process.

Since Coon followed the traditional methods of physical anthropology, relying on morphological characteristics, and not on the emerging genetics to classify humans, the debate over Origin of Races has been "viewed as the last gasp of an outdated scientific methodology that was soon to be supplanted".

Cheikh Anta Diop and "Negroid" primacy

Afrocentrist author Cheikh Anta Diop contrasted "Negroid" with "Cro-Magnoid" in his publications arguing for "Negroid" primacy. Grimaldi Man, Upper Paleolithic fossils found in Italy in 1901, had been classified as Negroid by Boule and Vallois (1921). The identification was obsolete by the 1960s, but was controversially revived by Diop in his work, "The African Origin of Civilizations" in 1974 and republished in 1989.

Physical features

General appearance

The Encyclopædia Britannica, Eleventh Edition (1910–1911), lists the following "well-defined characteristics" of the "Negroid" populations of Africa, southern India, Malaysia, and Australasia: "A dark skin, varying from dark brown, reddish-brown, or chocolate to nearly black; dark, tightly curled hair, flat in traverse section, of the woolly or the frizzly type; a greater or less tendency to prognathism; eyes dark brown with yellowish cornea; nose more or less broad and flat; and large teeth". The Encyclopædia Britannica sees a tendency towards a "tall stature" and "dolichocephaly" (long-headedness), with the exception of the Negritos who are described as showing "short stature" and "brachycephaly" (short-headedness).

Forensic anthropologists writing around the turn of the millennium described "Negroid" skulls as having a broad and round nasal cavity; no dam or nasal sill; Quonset hut-shaped nasal bones; notable facial projection in the jaw and mouth area (prognathism); a rectangular-shaped palate; a square or rectangular eye orbit shape; a large interorbital distance; a more undulating supraorbital ridge; and large teeth.

Neoteny

Ashley Montagu lists "neotenous structural traits in which ... Negroids differ from Caucasoids ... flattish nose, flat root of the nose, narrower ears, narrower joints, frontal skull eminences, later closure of premaxillary sutures, less hairy, longer eyelashes, cruciform pattern of second and third molars." He also suggested that in the extinct Negroid group termed the "Boskopoids", pedomorphic traits proceeded further than in other Negroids. Additionally, Montagu wrote that the Boskopoids had larger brains than modern humans (1,700 cubic centimeters cranial capacity compared to 1,400 cubic centimeters in modern-day humans), and the projection of their mouth was less than in other Negroids. He believed the Boskopoids were the ancestors of the Khoisan.

Athleticism

In the context of prominent successes of African-American athletes like Jesse Owens during the 1936 Summer Olympics, the speed advantage of the "Negroid type of calf, foot and heel bone" was discussed. Black Anthropologist W. Montague Cobb joined the debate in the same year, pointing out that "there is not a single physical characteristic, including skin color, which all the Negro stars have in common which definitely classify them as Negroes." Today, suggestions of biological differences in athletic ability between racial groups are considered unscientific.

Criticism

Black people
African diaspora
Asia-Pacific
African-derived culture
History
Race-related
Related topics

The Oxford Dictionary of English states: "The term Negroid belongs to a set of terms introduced by 19th-century anthropologists attempting to categorize human races. Such terms are associated with outdated notions of racial types, and so are now potentially offensive and best avoided."

Criticism based on modern genetics

See also: Race and genetics

In his 2016 essay Evolution and Notions of Human Race, Alan R. Templeton discusses various criteria used in biology to define subspecies or races. His examples for traits traditionally considered to be racial include skin colour: "he native peoples with the darkest skins live in tropical Africa and Melanesia." While those two groups would traditionally be classified as "black", in reality Africans are more closely related to Europeans than to Melanesians. Another example is malarial resistance, which is often found in African populations, but also in "many European and Asian populations".

Templeton concludes: "he answer to the question whether races exist in humans is clear and unambiguous: no."

Further reading

References

  1. "A very prominent racial dividing line between African Caucasian and Negroid groups runs west to east, south of the Sahara Desert into Sudan before curving southward toward the Kenyan-Somali border." Stephen Emerson, Hussein Solomon, African security in the twenty-first century: Challenges and opportunities, Oxford University Press (2018), p. 41.
  2. Molnar, Stephen (2006). Human Variation: Races, Types, and Ethnic Groups. Pearson Prentice Hall. p. 23. ISBN 978-0-13-192765-0.
  3. Templeton, A. (2016). "Evolution and Notions of Human Race". In Losos, J.; Lenski, R. (eds.). How Evolution Shapes Our Lives: Essays on Biology and Society. Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press. pp. 346–361. doi:10.2307/j.ctv7h0s6j.26.
  4. ^ American Association of Physical Anthropologists (27 March 2019). "AAPA Statement on Race and Racism". American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Retrieved 19 June 2020.
  5. Company, Houghton Mifflin (2005). The American Heritage guide to contemporary usage and style. Houghton Mifflin Company. p. 512. ISBN 978-0-618-60499-9.
  6. "Oid | Define Oid at Dictionary.com". Dictionary.reference.com. Retrieved 2012-06-12.
  7. Harper, Douglas (November 2001). "Online Etymological Dictionary". Retrieved 2007-11-06.
  8. Bhopal R (December 2007). "The beautiful skull and Blumenbach's errors: the birth of the scientific concept of race". BMJ. 335 (7633): 1308–1309. doi:10.1136/bmj.39413.463958.80. PMC 2151154. PMID 18156242. Blumenbach's name has been associated with scientific racism, but his arguments actually undermined racism. Blumenbach could not have foreseen the coming abuse of his ideas and classification in the 19th and (first half of the) 20th centuries.
  9. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1797). Handbuch der Naturgeschichte. p. 60. Retrieved 2020-05-24. Es giebt nur eine Gattung (species) im Menschengeschlecht; und alle uns bekannte Völker aller Zeiten und aller Himmelsstriche können von einer gemeinschaftlichen Stammrasse abstammen.
  10. German: "sehr willkürlich": Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1797). Handbuch der Naturgeschichte. p. 61. Retrieved 2020-05-24. Alle diese Verschiedenheiten fließen aber durch so mancherley Abstufungen und Uebergänge so unvermerkt zusammen, daß sich keine andre, als sehr willkürliche Grenzen zwischen ihnen festsetzen lassen.
  11. German: "Aethiopische Rasse": Johann Friedrich Blumenbach (1797). Handbuch der Naturgeschichte. p. 62. Retrieved 2020-06-06. Die Aethiopische Rasse: Abbild. n. h. Gegenst. tab. 5. mehr oder weniger schwarz; mit schwarzem krausem Haar; vorwärts prominirenden Kiefern, wulstigen Lippen, und stumpfer Nase. Dahin die übrigen Afrikaner, nahmentlich die Neger, die sich dann in die Habessinier, Mauren ꝛc. verlieren, so wie jede andre Menschen-Varietät mit ihren benachbarten Völkerschaften gleichsam zusammen fließt.
  12. ^ Sanders, Edith R. (October 1969). "The Hamitic Hypothesis; Its Origin and Functions in Time Perspective". The Journal of African History. 10 (4): 521–532. doi:10.1017/S0021853700009683. ISSN 1469-5138. JSTOR 179896. S2CID 162920355.
  13. Robinson, Michael F. (2016). The Lost White Tribe: Explorers, Scientists, and the Theory that Changed a Continent. Oxford University Press. pp. 96–97. ISBN 978-0-19-997850-2. Retrieved 19 February 2017.
  14. Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning. The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, New York: Nation Books 2016. ISBN 978-1-5685-8464-5, chapters 4, 7–12, 14, 16 passim.
  15. Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning. The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, New York: Nation Books 2016. ISBN 978-1-5685-8464-5, chapter 14.
  16. Michael, John S. "A New Look at Morton's Craniological Research". Current Anthropology, vol. 29, no. 2, 1988, pp. 349–354. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2743412. Accessed 15 June 2020.
  17. Stephen Jay Gould (17 June 2006). The Mismeasure of Man. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-0-393-31425-0. Retrieved 2020-06-11. and by: Emily S. Renschler and Janet Monge. "The Samuel George Morton Cranial Collection. Historical Significance and New Research". Retrieved 2020-06-11.
  18. Mismeasure for mismeasure. Nature 474, 419 (2011). doi:10.1038/474419a
  19. Huxley, T. H. On the Geographical Distribution of the Chief Modifications of Mankind (1870) Journal of the Ethnological Society of London.
  20. The German legend of the map shows the following names: Hamiten, Australier, Melanesier, Negritos, Afrikanische Neger, Hottentotten.
  21. Roy L. Brooks uses the adjective "scientific" inside quotation marks in his discussion of that entry and its connection with Jim Crow laws: Brooks, Roy L., editor. "Redress for Racism?" When Sorry Isn't Enough: The Controversy Over Apologies and Reparations for Human Injustice, NYU Press, 1999, pp. 395–398. JSTOR j.ctt9qg0xt.75. Accessed 17 Aug. 2020.
  22. ^ Joyce, Thomas Athol (1911). "Negro" . In Chisholm, Hugh (ed.). Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 11 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 344–349, see page 344.
  23. ^ Jackson Jr., John (June 2001). ""In Ways Unacademical": The Reception of Carleton S. Coon's The Origin of Races". Journal of the History of Biology. 34 (2): 247–285. doi:10.1023/A:1010366015968. JSTOR 4331661. S2CID 86739986.
  24. ^ "The Race Question", UNESCO, 1950, 11pp
  25. Carleton S. Coon (1962). The Origin of Races. pp. 3–4. comprises the Negroes and Pygmies of Africa. I have named it Congoid after the region (not a specific nation) which contains both kinds of people. The term Negroid has been deliberately omitted to avoid confusion. It has been applied both to Africans and the spiral-haired peoples of Southern Asia and Oceania who are not genetically related to each other, as far as we know.
  26. Coon, Carleton S. (1982). Racial adaptations. Nelson-Hall. p. 11. ISBN 978-0-8304-1012-5. The five primary races are the Caucasoid, Mongoloid, Australoid, Congoid (more commonly called Negroid), and the Capoid
  27. Cited according to Jackson Jr., John (June 2001). ""In Ways Unacademical": The Reception of Carleton S. Coon's The Origin of Races". Journal of the History of Biology. 34 (2): 248. doi:10.1023/A:1010366015968. JSTOR 4331661. S2CID 86739986. The reference given there is to "Coon, Origin of the Races, 1963 , p. 657".
  28. Carlson, David; Armelagos, George (September 1971). "Problems in Racial Geography". Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 61 (3): 630–633. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.1971.tb00812.x.
  29. Dobzhansky, Theodosius; Ashley Montagu; C. S. Coon (1963). "Two Views of Coon's "Origin of Races" with Comments by Coon and Replies". Current Anthropology. 4 (4): 360–367. doi:10.1086/200401. S2CID 145245427.
  30. Diop, Cheikh Anta (1974). The African origin of civilization: myth or reality (1st ed.). New York: L. Hill. p. 266. ISBN 1-55652-072-7.
  31. Masset, C. (1989): Grimaldi : une imposture honnête et toujours jeune, Bulletin de la Société préhistorique française, vol. 86, n° 8, pp. 228–243. "Cornevin seems to ignore the depth of morphological differences that exist between the Black and the White when he dates these differences back to Antiquity as recent as the eleventh millennium B.C. By doing so he opposes the one hypothesis at the disposal of scholars to confer upon the Whites an antiquity equal to that of the Blacks. He errs most regrettably in claiming that the Asselar man looks more like the Cro-Magnoid European of Grimladi and the Bushman than like modern Blacks. By definition, the Grimaldi Negorid is not Cro-Magnoid, and he is the only one the Asselar man could possibly resemble; he shares no feature with the so-called Cro-Magnon man who lived later in the same cave and is the prototype of the White race as the 'Negroid' is the prototype of the Black race." C. A. Diop, The African Origin of Civilization: Myth Or Reality (1989), p. 266.
  32. A critical reflection on the use of "Negroid" and related terms in this context is given by: Diana Smay, George Armelagos (2000). "Galileo wept: A critical assessment of the use of race of forensic anthropolopy" (PDF). Transforming Anthropology. 9 (2): 22–24. doi:10.1525/tran.2000.9.2.19. S2CID 143942539. Archived from the original (PDF) on 18 August 2018. Retrieved 13 July 2016.
  33. George W. Gill; Stanley Rhine, eds. (1990). Skeletal Attribution of Race: Methods for Forensic Anthropology. Maxwell Museum of Anthropology. ISBN 978-0-912535-06-7. OCLC 671604288.
  34. Wilkinson, Caroline (2004). Forensic Facial Reconstruction. Cambridge University Press. pp. 84–85. ISBN 978-0-521-82003-5. Retrieved 2 June 2015.
  35. Brace CL, Tracer DP, Yaroch LA, Robb J, Brandt K, Nelson AR, Clines and clusters versus "race:" a test in ancient Egypt and the case of a death on the Nile, (1993), Yrbk Phys Anthropol 36:1–31, p.18
  36. ^ Montagu, Ashley Growing Young Published by Greenwood Publishing Group, 1988 ISBN 0-89789-166-X
  37. ^ Wiggins, David K. (1989). ""Great Speed But Little Stamina:" The Historical Debate Over Black Athletic Superiority" (PDF). Journal of Sport History. 16 (2): 158–185. S2CID 27097059. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2019-02-16.
  38. ^ Cited in: Ibram X. Kendi, Stamped from the Beginning. The Definitive History of Racist Ideas in America, New York: Nation Books 2016. ISBN 978-1-5685-8464-5, chapter 27.
  39. Saini, Angela (23 July 2019). "Sports and IQ: the persistence of race 'science' in competition". Nature. 571 (7766): 474–475. Bibcode:2019Natur.571..474S. doi:10.1038/d41586-019-02244-w. S2CID 198191524.
  40. Wiggins, David K. (2018). More Than a Game: A History of the African American Experience in Sport. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 151. ISBN 978-1-5381-1498-8.
  41. "Interview with Robert Graves Jr". PBS.org. 2003.
  42. Stevenson, Angus (2010). Oxford Dictionary of English. OUP Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-957112-3. As of 2020, the same text was still present on the website: "Ask Oxford – Definition of Negroid". Oxford Dictionary of English. 2020. Archived from the original on 2018-06-30. Retrieved 2020-08-05.
  43. ^ Templeton, A. (2016). EVOLUTION AND NOTIONS OF HUMAN RACE. In Losos J. & Lenski R. (Eds.), How Evolution Shapes Our Lives: Essays on Biology and Society (pp. 346–361). Princeton; Oxford: Princeton University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctv7h0s6j.26. That this view reflects the consensus among American anthropologists is stated in: Wagner, Jennifer K.; Yu, Joon-Ho; Ifekwunigwe, Jayne O.; Harrell, Tanya M.; Bamshad, Michael J.; Royal, Charmaine D. (February 2017). "Anthropologists' views on race, ancestry, and genetics". American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 162 (2): 318–327. doi:10.1002/ajpa.23120. PMC 5299519. PMID 27874171. See also: American Association of Physical Anthropologists (27 March 2019). "AAPA Statement on Race and Racism". American Association of Physical Anthropologists. Retrieved 19 June 2020.
Obsolete definitions of race
Color terminology
Concepts
Sociological
Writers
Publications
Related
Categories: