Biology Reference
In-Depth Information
(skin color, head shape) and cultural characteristics (language, social status, “level” of civili-
zation) were biologically determined (
Caspari, 2003
), meaning that sociocultural traits in
addition to physical traits were inherited.
Physical anthropologists practicing in the late nineteenth century such as Samuel Morton
(in the United States) and Paul Broca (in France) measured physical attributes (e.g., cranial
shape and cranial capacity) for scientific justification of the existing hierarchical race rankings
(
Haller, 1995; Gould, 1996
). They assumed races existed and therefore attempted to describe
and measure the characteristics that could clearly define or type each racial group.
This use of science to justify differences (physical and cultural) between different groups
of people continues and is known as scientific racism. Scientific racism has had tragic
consequences, perhaps most notably with the eugenics movement of the late nineteenth
century and early twentieth century. The goal of eugenics was to prevent undesirable
traits from accumulating in the population by preventing people with such traits from
reproducing (
Shipman, 1994; Gould, 1996
). In this sense, “undesirable” included poverty,
alcoholism, homosexuality, and/or being physically disabled in addition to membership
in certain races
d
so the definition includes traits that we now know are not necessarily heri-
table or those that are heavily influenced by sociocultural factors. The eugenics movement
was actualized most brutally and tragically through the Holocaust perpetrated by Nazi
Germany. But there were tragic consequences felt in the United States as well. Forced ster-
ilizations and strict immigration policies were two such results (
Gould, 1996
).
The Roles of Hooton, Hrdli
cka, and Boas in Early Physical Anthropology
The fledgling discipline of physical anthropology in the United States during the first half
of the twentieth century owes its development and solidification as a discipline in large part
to the major contributions of three anthropologists: Earnest Hooton, Ale
s Hrdli
cka, and Franz
Boas.
13
Hooton and Hrdli
cka had similar ideas regarding the race concept, while Boas was on
the opposite end of the spectrum. Hooton and Hrdli
cka both used typological approaches to
human variation, believing that races could be hierarchically arranged and that types existed.
Conversely, Boas was the first to argue against types and for the critical role that culture had
to play with influencing human differences. As a result, two separate schemata of physical
anthropology developed: “Washingtonian” and “Boasian.” Given that Hrdli
cka was on staff
at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington, D.C., his ideas typified the Washingtonian
camp, with Boas' contrary ideas making up the Boasian camp.
As mentioned, Hrdli
cka and Hooton both considered the history of races as central
to anthropology (
Armelagos and Van Gerven, 2003
) with Hrdli
cka defining “physical anthro-
pology” as the study of comparative human racial anatomy (
Blakey, 1987
). However, while
Hrdli
cka did not produce students in his position at the museum, his legacy in addition to
his scholarship is in the founding of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology (AJPA)
in 1918 and the American Association of Physical Anthropologists (AAPA) in 1929 (
Brace, 2005
).
13
There is much, much more to learn about the contributions and philosophies of each of these scholars and
how they have shaped biological anthropology that cannot be summed up in a few paragraphs here. Some
authoritative sources are
Krogman (1976), Spencer (1979)
, and
Birdsell (1987)
. Further, do not neglect to
read the contributions of each scholar.
