From Types to Populations: A Century of Race, Physical Anthropology, and the American Anthropological Association Author(s): Rachel Caspari Source: American Anthropologist, Vol. 105, No. 1, Special Issue: Biological Anthropology: Historical Perspectives on Current Issues, Disciplinary Connections, and Future Directions (Mar., 2003), pp. 65-76 Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Anthropological Association Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3567314 Accessed: 03-12-2015 05:35 UTC Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/ info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Anthropological Association and Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to American Anthropologist. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Thu, 03 Dec 2015 05:35:31 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions RACHEL CASPARI FromTypes to Populations:A Centuryof Race, PhysicalAnthropology, and the American AnthropologicalAssociation ABSTRACT Inthe 1960s,U.S. physical anthropology underwent a period of introspection that marked a changefrom the old physi- cal anthropologythat was largelyrace based to thenew physical anthropology, espoused by Washburn and others for over a decade, whichincorporated the evolutionary biology of the modern synthesis. What actually changed? What elements of the race concept have beenrejected, and what elements have persisted, influencing physical anthropology today? In this article, I examine both the scientific and socialinfluences on physicalanthropology that caused changes in the race concept, in particular the influence of the American AnthropologicalAssociation. The race concept is complicated but entails three attributes: essentialism, cladistic thinking, and biologi- cal determinism.These attributes have not all been discarded; while biological determinism and itssocial implications have been ques- tionedsince the inception of the field, essentialism and theconcomitant rendering of populations as cladespersists as a legacyof the raceconcept. [Keywords: race, essentialism, physical anthropology] HE EVENTSSURROUNDING THE PUBLICATION of pologiststhat these biological subdivisionscorresponded T CarletonCoon's The Originof Races in 1962 reflect- to the social meaningsof race,a notion thatlinked physi- ed a major change in U.S. physicalanthropology. Coon cal and behavioralcharacteristics. This link between the suggestedthat five major racesof humansevolved in par- componentsof an essence providedthe basis forthe bio- allel fromHomo erectus at fivedifferent times and at differ- logicaldeterminism prevalent in the racialthinking of the ent rates. He furthersuggested that each racial lineage time.Throughout the 20th century,race also had an evo- crossedthe sapiens"threshold" at differenttimes in pre- lutionarycomponent. Races were effectively thought of as historyand impliedthat the lengthof timeeach had been clades. Differentessences were explained as a productof in the sapiensstate was correlatedwith the level of "cul- poorlyunderstood evolutionary processes, as exemplified turalachievement" of differentracial groups.Coon con- by Coon's notionof independently evolving racial lineages. tended that Causcasoids and Mongoloids crossed this The discourseCoon's book spawned contributedto thresholdconsiderably earlier than Africans (Negroids and currentswithin the fieldthat ultimatelyforced an end to Capoids) and Australians(Australoids), a claim thatclearly the old physical anthropologycentered mainly on the had social implications. raceconcept and helpedusher in the new physicalanthro- Race had held immenseimportance within the field pology,espoused by SherryWashburn, which had been of physicalanthropology during the time leading up to developingthroughout the 1950s. The new anthropology the publicationof Coon's work.At the emergenceof the was eclectic(incorporating various subjects from primates subdiscipline,race was the major theoreticalfoundation to genetics)and was an evolutionaryscience, whose popu- of anthropology;physical anthropology was virtuallysyn- lationalapproaches were incompatible with the essential- onymouswith the studyof race. In 1902, at the inception ism centralto the raceconcept. The Origin of Races brought of the AmericanAnthropological Association (AAA), most to a head the riftswithin physical anthropology as a disci- anthropologistsconsidered "race" to representthe way pline, the tensionsbetween the subdisciplinesof anthro- the human specieswas internallysubdivided. Essentialism pology,and discussionsabout the role of anthropologyin was implicitin thisidea; a racewas thoughtto representa the publicarena. naturalcategory with unique featuresthat defined the es- The AAA'sreaction to thebook was decisive.Washburn, sence of thatcategory.' It seemedobvious to manyanthro- then presidentof the association, delivereda scathing AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST 105(1):65-76. COPYRIGHT ? 2003, AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGICALASSOCIATION This content downloaded from 159.178.22.27 on Thu, 03 Dec 2015 05:35:31 UTC All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 66 AmericanAnthropologist * Vol. 105, No. 1 * March 2003 addressdenouncing the book aroundthe timeof itspubli- thropologyas embodiedby the AAA.It is interestingthat cation at the AAAAnnual Meeting in Chicago on Novem- as earlyas 1894, a quartercentury prior to the emergence ber 16, 1962. The publishedversion (Washburn 1963) is of physicalanthropology as a truesubdiscipline, Boas be- much less harsh,focusing on the limiteduse of race as a gan to challengethe race concept. By the time physical valid object of studyand the lack of scientificsupport for anthropologyclearly emerged in the 1920s,Boas's follow- any claims of racial inferiority.Public denunciation of ers held some of the most powerfulpositions within U.S. Coon's ideas seemed necessary;segregationists were al- anthropologyand were a dominant voice in the AAA. readyusing them to bolstertheir arguments. There were a Therefore,the racial physicalanthropology that was re- varietyof responsesfrom the scientificcommunity. State- jected in the 1960s developedwithin a broaderanthropo- mentson racewere issued by both theAAA and theAmeri- logical contextthat had been grapplingwith the racecon- can Associationof PhysicalAnthropologists (AAPA). Sev- cept foryears; parts of thatcommunity already questioned eral edited volumes appeared throughoutthe 1960s race,and the AAAhad been involvedin strugglesover the critiquingthe race concept.In 1966, MargaretMead and issue of race betweenanthropology and governmentpoli- Theodosius Dobzhanskyorganized an AmericanAssocia- cies and funding,as well as strugglesbetween anthropol- tion forthe Advancementof Science (AAAS)symposium ogy and othersciences. The rejectionof race in the 1960s meantto deliverthe scientificvoice againsta popularra- was not so new; it was a partof the heritageof physicalan- cism based on "misinformation"and "evil myths"about thropologywithin U.S. anthropology. race.As embodied its by organizers,the symposiumrepre- This historysuggests that the race concepthas no re- sentedan alliance betweenBoasian cultural anthropology maining legacyin physicalanthropology. What actually and evolutionarybiology, including diverse perspectives changed?Is the race conceptreally dead? What elements fromwithin anthropology,genetics, ethnology, psychol- of the race conceptstill persist and influencephysical an- and With few most anthro- ogy, sociology. exceptions, thropologytoday? In thisarticle, I addressthese questions, had become to pologists opposed hereditarianclaims investigatingthem within the contextof the scientificand about race and and werenow intelligence, many skeptical social influenceson mainstreamphysical anthropology of the race itself.What became clear the mid- concept by thatwere a major forcein the evolutionof the race con- 1960s was that race was no a in longer unifyingconcept cept. I arguethat some elementsof the race conceptwere mainstream as it had ceased to physicalanthropology, just in factrejected, but thatothers remain, subtly influencing be a for as a whole since unifyingconcept anthropology ourviews of what we todayterm "populations." Boas's workon race a halfcentury earlier. In physicalan- thropology,race was now a divisiveconcept. Although THE ATTRIBUTESOF THERACE CONCEPT Washburnhad publishedhis ideas about the new anthro- The race concept that was examined and rejectedby so pology earlier,this periodmarked a turningpoint in the many in the 1960s includesassumptions about the cause discipline,with greater institutional introspection on the and natureof geographic and otherkinds of variation. The race concept. Some have even arguedthat it markedthe historybehind these assumptionshas createthe demiseof therace concept. helped conceptthat we grapplewith today. forthe last Severalfactors influenced changing views about race Although 100 years the race concept has been about in withinphysical anthropology during this time. First,so- thought quasi-evolutionaryterms, its most fundamentalelements cial factorsprompted scientists to challengeassumptions are essentialism,clades, and determinism.These