Issues in the Studyof Race: Two Views from Poland, withDiscussion

1. of The Raclal Analysis Human Populations in Relationto Their Ethnogenesis

S

byAndrzejWiercinski
about the 1. There is considerablelack of agreement general conceptof race, on which any racial classificationmustdepend.The conceptofrace,beinga theoretistate of human racial PRESENT UNSATISFACTORY THE cal interpretation the positionof races as taxonomic of and especially the application of racial classification, to may be attributed fourfactors: units within the species Homo sapiens,' is linked data to ethnogenesis, with geneticor evoclosely,but not always explicitly, about thegeneralconceptof race; (1) lack of agreement lutionaryhypotheses. This connectionis apparent in analmethodsforthetypological (2) theuse of different of the historicaldevelopment methodsand theoriesin about the ysisof populations; (3) lack of information and its related biological disci(4) of genetictransmission racial characters; difficulties physicalanthropology interposedby the political implicationsof racistcon- plines. In the studyof race, at least foursuch concepts may be distinguished (Wiercinski,1958): environmencepts. talist; panmixionist;populationist; and individualist. methodsforthe typological 2. Many different analysis of populations,includingpure description racial of TADEUSZ BIELICKI is Lecturer in anthropology at the University characters well as statistical as methodsforsegregating of of Warsaw. Born in 1932,he was educated at the University and comparing traits, have been conceivedand applied. Warsaw (B.A. 1952) and at the Universityof Wroclaw (M.Sc. 1955; Ph.D. 1959). In 1959-60he studied on a RockefellerFounin in These differences methodproducegreatdiversity of dation grant at the University California at Los Angeles. He the definition and descriptionof taxonomicunits. In has done fieldwork in southeasternand central Poland (1956race, based definition description, Mediterranean and a 57) and in Lower Silesia (1958). His publications include 9 interested He is currently papers, mostlyconcerningtypology. on supposedresemblances means among the arithmetic in problems of natural selection in man. of single metricalfeaturesin such ethnicpopulations ANDRZEJ WIERCI&SKI is Lecturer in Physical Anthropology at is as Spaniards,Italians, and Egyptians, quite different the Universityof Warsaw, Poland. Born in 1930, he was eduby from Mediterranean the type,whichis distinguished cated at the Universityof Warsaw (M.Sc. 1951) and the Universityof L6dz (Ph.D. 1957). He has done much archeological diagnosingtheracial affinities individualsindependof field-work Poland (1949-1961) and in in and anthropometrical ently of their ethnic origins. The definitionof the publications Egypt (1959). He is the author of over 20 scientific former, includingthe averagetypesof thewhole popudealing with raciology,methodology and paleoanthropology. He developed, togetherwith A. Goralski, the formalapproach degreeof indilation,willshow,at least,a muchgreater and to the tempo of developmentof human skull in phylogeny vidual variability. Anotherpossibledefinition racial of interpretation. ontogenywith cybernetical methodsused by typesis offered the cartographic by was These two articleswere receivedseparately.Wiercin'ski's submittedon July 16, 1960 and Bielicki's on October 1, 1960. concentraDenikerand Biasuttito discover extreme the Since the two discussed similar material, it was decided to tionsof traitsin different areas. geographic with single CA* treatment. They were publish them together, Differences may also arise among adherentsto the sent to 49 scholarsof whom the followingresponded,commenting on eitherone or both of the articles: AndrewAbbie, James same concept or method,particularlywith the older D. Boyd,VictorBunak, Lidio Cipriani, Carleton Coon, Theodoof systems, wheretheethnicunitson whichdefinition a sius Dobzhansky,Stanley M. Garn, Dale R. Givens,Jean HierINTRODUCTION
(Continued on page 9) 1In this paper, only subdivisionsof Homo beginning with the Upper Paleolithic period will be considered; other types of fossil hominids are not taken into account here.
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

naux, Edward E. Hunt, Jr., Gabriel W. Lasker, Ireneusz Michaelski,ArthurE. Mourant, and Lawrence Oschinsky.The commentswrittenforpublication are printed in full after the authors' texts and are followed by replies from the authors who also commenton each other'sarticles.

RacialAnalysis Populations of
(Continued frompage 2)

Wiercifiski:

RACIAL

ANALYSIS

chosenby the givenrace or typewas based were freely authorand depended on his general knowledgeof the data. lies 3.; The thirdsourceof confusion in our comparaof tivelyslightknowledgeof the genetic transmission racial characteristics. Geneticstudiesof the inheritance of single racial traitshave oftenreached contradictory conclusions.Thus, Hurst (1908), Fischer (1913), and Rodenwaldt(1927) foundthatdarkskincolorwas dominant; but Davenport(1928) was unable to finda simple dominant and recessive relation in pigmentation. Fischer (1913) apparently showed the dominance of but Bean's (1911) inwoolly hair over the wavyform, hair, vestigations gave opposite results;while straight accordingto Tao (1935), is dominantover wavy.This same confusionappears in researchon the inheritance of head form.Gates (1946), citing studies by Dunn, Hagen, Bryn,and Hilden, concludes that brachycephaly seems dominant;while Frets(1921) has shown the thatbrachycephaly recessiveamong some is possibility Dutch families.As for the nasal index, Leicher (1929) proved the dominance of the narrow nose over the broad form;but Davenport and Steggerda(1928), like Rodenwaldt (1927) held the opposite opinion. Many maybe foundin examplesof thiskind of disagreement the literature. 4. Political and ideological factors also hinder a satisfactory resolutionof problemsof racial classification. The generalconceptof race has been affected by racisttheories, especiallythose that arose in Germany, where Gunther,the ideological supporterof Nordic based his conceptionson the individualist Supremacy, approach to race. His opponentsturnedto the populabut tionistconcept as a counterargument, overlooked the real basis of racism,which is not any particular anthropologicalconcept of race, but ratherthe judgin mentthatdifferences culturalcapacitiesamong races of constituted main factorin the history mankind. the racism It should be noted thatthe much moreextreme based on pure conceivedbyAlfredRosenbergwas itself populationistconcepts. have clouded the subject of racial These fourfactors Instead of dispassionatediscussionbased classification. on facts-i.e.,on individualsas definedby theirsets of external (phenotypic)and internal (genotypic)racial features-wefinda greatnumberof clashinghypotheses and evenpolitico-philosophical speculations. HISTORICAL REVIEW OF CONCEPTS OF RACE
AND PANMIXIONISM

human types very are unstableand variable.The implicationsofsuch conceptswerepointedout by S. S. Smith (1810: 240):
The conclusionto be drawn fromall thisvarietyof opinions is,perhaps,thatit is impossibleto draw theline precisely betweenthevariousracesofman,or even,to enumeratethem withcertainty thatit is itself uselesslabor to attempt and a it.

A consequence of the environmentalist concept of racewas theacceptanceof geographic ethnicboundaor ries as the main criteriaof racial division. These samecriteria dominated19th-century concepts of race throughbelief in the leveling action of panmixia (the unrestricted mixingof strains a group) on in crossbreeding populations. By popular analogy, this action was understoodas mixingof the blood, and has sometimes been called "the blood theory"(Boyd 1950). Panmixia, acting over a sufficiently long time, was thoughtto lead to the stabilizationof an average type of population which could consist of quite different primarycomponents.Thus, hybridization was considered the main factorin the formation new races in of recent periods, and ethnic populations were consequentlyregardedas taxonomicunits and arrangedin various classifications 19th-century by anthropologists. the of Naturally, numbers, names,and definitions these units differed. The classifications Broca and Flower of (Tables 1 and 2), whichare typicalof thisperiod,show a decisiveprevalenceof ethno-geographic criteriaover morpho-biological ones. The quantityand quality of the taxonomic units are unequal. To the same taxonomic level Broca assignssuch different groupsas Australasians, Mulattoes, and Hottentots, whichare defined
CLASSIFICATION P. P. BROCA,1836 OF TABLE 1-THE RACIAL
(AFTERVON EICKSTEDT 1937).

Premiersous-genre. -Varietes blanches A. Souche Europeenne. 1. La tige Caucasique. 2. La tige Pelagique. 3. La tige Celtique. dite4. La tige Germanique. a) Branche Teutonique. b) Branche Slave. B. Souche Orientale. 1. La tige Arabique. a) La famille occidentale ou atlantique. b) La familleorientale ou adamique ou s6mitique. 2. La tige orientale ou indienne. Patagons (

Second sous-genre. -Varietes jaunes ou olivatres A. Souche Tongouse. B. Souche Mongole. 1. Les Mongols proprement 2( ment dite. 2. Les Kalmouks. 3. Les Yakoutes. (((((((((((((((((((((((((( Variete Hindoue. Variete Malaise. Variete Hyperboreenne. Troisieme sous-genre. -Varietes noires A. Les Ethiopiens. B. Les Cafres. C. Les Hottentots. D. Les Australasiens. E. Les Oceaniens. ((((((((((((((((((((((((( F. Les Mulatres. Quatrieme sous-genre.

ENVIRONMENTALISM

The conceptsof human race in the earliestclassifications were influenced by environmentalism, exas Blumenbach,and theirfollowers. pounded by Buffon, In his Histoire naturelle (1749) Buffonadvanced the thatsuch externalfactors diet,climate,mode as theory of life,and epidemicdiseasesplay a role in the formation of racial varieties.Actingover a long time,these stabilizationof the factorsshould lead to hereditary racial characteristics a givenhuman population; but, of frequently because the externalenvironment changes,
Vol. 3 -No. 1 -February1962

-Race rouge

W. H.

OF CLASSIFICATION TABLE 2-THE RACIAL FLOWER, 1885(AFTERVON EICKSTEDT 1937).

I. The Ethiopian or Negroid races. A. Africanor typicalNegroes. B. Hottentots and Bushmen. C.. Oceanic Negroes or Melanesians. D. Negritos. II. The Mongolian type. A. The Eskimo. B. The typicalMongolian. a) Mongolo-Altaicgroup. b) SouthernMongolian group. C. The Malay. D. The Polynesians. E. The nativepopulation of Americaexcludingthe Eskimo. III. The Caucasians.

betweenaveragetypes ethnicsamples of Comparisons were seldom properlyestimated statistically. However, better methods were stimulated by the work of the English BiometricSchool, whose proceduremay be illustratedby Fawcett's (1901) studyof Naqada skulls. Fawcett's conclusion about their homogeneitywas based on thefitting frequency of of curves singlequantitativecharacters the assumednormaldistribution to of Gauss.3 In accordance with Fawcett's resultsis Pearson'sstatement about thegeneralconceptofrace (1905: 118-19): The purest race, I havesaidelsewhere, for theone as is me which beenisolated, has and for intrabred, selected thelongestperiod. may It wellin thedimpasthavebeena blendof themostdiverse elements.

ancient Egyptian paintings. One, called fin,was characterizedby high stature, meso- to brachycephaly,oval face, prominent and frequentlyconvex nose, etc. Another type, grossier,was shortstatured,stout, and dolichocephalic, with crude facial traits and broad concave nose. Here, Chantre contradictedhis own position as an adherent to the panmixionist concept.
10

Another methodologicalpossibilitywas opened by thecartographic methodofmappingtraitdistributions, A. The Xanthochroi. whose superiority lies in its eliminationof ethnic or B. The Melanochroi. linguisticcriteria.By showingthe spatial distribution of sets of physicaltraits, thismethodfacilitates discovery of the areas where their combinationsare most and morphogenetic, ethno- heavilyconcentrated. respectively geographic, by The more or less precisedescripFlower's Mongolian type tionsof linguisticcriteria.Similarly, the types European populationsobtainedby of includesEskimos,Malays,and AmericanIndians,while Deniker provideda firm base forfurther development his Caucasians consistof only Xanthochroiand Melaof raciologywithinthe limitsof the individualistconcriteria. nochroi-i.e.,are dividedbyone morphological cept of race. of This hopelesschaos in conceptions human taxonPanmixionism also characterizedconcepts of race in omyis fullyreflected Von Eickstedt's(1937) histori- during the early20th century; moderngenetic theory The cal reviewofracial classifications. major taxonomic had notyetaffected anthropology, theold methods and or units,usuallybased on roughgeographiccriteria on of analysis were retained. A good example of such single traits,are subdivided into a great number of studiesis A. C. Haddon's classification (Table 3), which ethnic or regional populasmaller units,constituting preserves the characteristic all traitsof earlierconceptions. tions. Haddon, like d' Orbigny,defineda race as "a of definitions race ignored main divisionof Althoughmanytheoretical mankindthe membersof which have factors heredity, important of nonbiological criteriaand stressed physicalcharacters common"(1924: 117). in did withthe taxonomic "Main such definitions not correspond division" and "important" could be misleading units on which taxonomical practice.The elementary expressionsif understoodliterally,but actually they by simply meant a werepopulationsdefined operationswereperformed group of populations in which the or boundaries.And there averagesof ethnic,linguistic, geographic diagnosticfeatures fall withinthe limitsof were also definitions which agreed with the practicea conventionalcategory. spite of his theoretical In inforinstance,thatof d'Orbigny (W. Scheidt1925),who tentions, Haddon's classification burdenedby ethnic is regardedas a race an ethnicgroup that was character- and geographic criteria, and most of his smallerunits ized by commonphysicalhabitat. are ethnically defined populations. The panmixionistbelief in average typeof populationwas accompaniedby appropriate methodsof racial MENDELIAN POPULATIONISM analysis.Racial studieswere based mainlyon compariA new approach to the studyof race evolved as ansons of arithmetic means of single metriccharactersthropology assimilatedthe conceptsof classic Mendeland also of indices, afterRetzius-and on analysis of distributions quantitativeor qualitative ism. The populationistconcept of race has attracted of frequency and A characters. typicalexample is Chantre's (1904) work many adherents among modern anthropologists Boas (1938), Coon (1939, 1955),Kluckhohn on Egypt.From comparisonsamong sets of arithmetic geneticists: (1949), Garn (1955), Birdsell (1950), Dunn and Dobfeatures a numberof of means forcertaincraniometric ancientand modernEgyptianseries,Chantreinferred zhansky(1946), and others.Their viewshave been well by that the Egyptianracial typeconstituted homogene- set forth AshleyMontagu (1950). a Unfortunately, approach has not materiallyafthis ous taxonomic unit, in spite of numerouswell-docuor of and movements populations.2 fectedthemethodology taxonomy racial classificaof mentedimmigrations tion.The ethnicor geographicpopulation remainsthe basic unit of classification, reasonssimilarto those for 20On the other hand, as a good morphologist,Chantre distinguished two types in the Egyptian population on the basis of responsiblefor its retentionin panmixionist theory.
3It has now been established that this assumptionis ratheruncertain; i.e., it may be said that if differences between empirical and normal distributions significant, population being inare the vestigatedis perhaps heterogenic;if not, no certain inferences are possible.
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

T'ABLE 3-THE

CLASSIFICATION OF W.

C.

HADDON

(1924).

RACIAL Wierczfiski:

ANALYSIS

FAndamanese Negrito Ulotrichi Orientales

Melanesian

Semang
LTapiro

Papuan

5
Ulotrichi
,Africani

Akka {Batwa BNegrillo ambute etc. | Bushmen Hottentot Negro Nilote "Bantu"

Pre-Dravidian Pre-Dravidian

Sakai Vedda Jungle tribesof southIndia Bhil Gond Oraon Kolarian

Australian Dravidian

{Hamite

Dolichocephals

Indo-Afghan Indonesian Palaeo-Amerind Eurafrican {Semite Mediterranean

FrAtlanto-Mediterranean Mesocephals

Pyrenean

{LNordic
Ainu

AlpoI Iranian

rSCarpathian

Eurasiatic Brachycepbals

IllyrioAnatolian Prospectatores Beaker-Folk

Dolichocephals Mesocephals
0

Eskimo Palaearcticus(Ugrian or Palaeo-Asiatic

PaeASinicus

NorthernAmerind

Centralis, Tungus or Mongol Pareoean or SouthernMongoloid Brachycephals Polynesian Neo-Amerind Tehuelche LNorth-west coastAmerind Vol. 3 -No. 1 -February1962

Turki

Formerly understoodas being analogous to a solution of different kinds of "blood," the "population" race now denotesa mechanicalmixtureof a greater amount of corpusculary-conceived genes. In other words the "blood theory" been replacedbywhatmaybe called has the "corpuscularmixture theory."All definitions offeredby modernpopulationistsemphasizeintrabreeding populationsas theelementary unitson whichclassificatory manipulationsare to be made. The basis forpopulationismis the discovery thatracial features determined a seriesof independent, are by randomly-combining genes. Except for monozygotic twins, is therefore it veryunlikelythat two individuals will have identical genotypes. Hence, 'the term"race" is meaningless faras individualsare concerned, so and can be applied onlyto a population or a group ofpopulations.Everypopulation in whichthe processof intrabreedingoccursmaybe a race. Montagu, the most ardent adherentof populationism,writes:"The group is the species,the populations are the race" (1950: 317). He cites definitions Epby pling ("If races are incipientspecies,nations could be regardedas incipientraces,but only if theymaintain their boundarieslong enough" 1950: 317),and by Keith ("A race is a more-or-less isolated population of the speciesHomo sapiens whichdiffers fromotherpopulationsof thesamespeciesin theincidenceof one or more genes" 1950: 320). An even more significant based on the definition, rapid processof equal distribution genes,is givenby of Montagu as follows: "A much mixed population may be a race in precisely same sense as a long isolated the one whichis in geneticequilibrium"(1950: 320). Regardlessof theintentions thepopulationists, of the consequenceof thedefinitions cited above is theidentificationof the term"race" with "ethnic population." Thus, it is possible to speak in such terms "English as race," "German race" or "Judaic race" (Keith 1948). Montagu (1945: 73) who fearstheracistimplications of the term"race," proposesitsexpulsionfrom our vocabulary and the substitution "ethnic group" for bioof logical or ecological contexts.But the biological and ecological contextof human populations is usefulfor scientific studyeven thoughused forthe mostfantastic philosophicalspeculations. "Ethnic group," in fact,is an even more dangerous concept,opening possibilitiesforracist theoriesabout thebiological superiority entirenationsor nationaliof ties that can be worse than the more moderate-and sociallyand politicallyless dangerous-racism based on units. This statement morphologically-distinguished can be confirmed a briefreviewof Germanracism, by in whichtwo trendscan be distinguished. The earliest and best-known these was the concept of "Nordic of of Supremacy," whichH. F. K. Guinther (1937),was the main theoretician, whichwas based on theassumed and superiorcapabilityof theNordic type, conceivedin the individualist sense.Because Gunther's definition the of Nordic typeapplied to individualssharinga common physicaland psychicalhabitus,regardless theirethof nic origins,Guntherwas forcedto distinguish whole a seriesof different racial typesconstituting German the
11

nation. Consequently,adherentsof the Nordic moveto ment held it was necessary increasethe number of Nordic individuals by suitable eugenic measuresand special reproductive institutions. was led byJ. Kaup, A movement opposed to Gunther who clearly saw that a German nation, all of whose citizens belongedto a "Germanrace" in a populationist sense, offereda more convenientsociotechnical tool than Guinther's individualistconceptof a Nordic type to which only a veryfew Germanscould belong. Any notionofrace thatwould coverthenationalboundaries had an importantideological role for the Nazi movement. The populationist context of the well-known reflected Nazi legin viewsof AlfredRosenbergis fully of islation identifying ethnicand "racial" affinities the to Jews.Discrimination was not restricted individuals or showing an Oriental-Armenoid any other type of habitus,but was directedagainstall individualsbelonging to the Jewishethnicpopulation. This very brief sketch Germanracismindicatesthat of while populationistand individualistconceptsmay be equally useful forracist speculations,theirdegreesof The individualistconcept sociotechnical differ. efficacy ofraceemphasizes commonphysicalhabitusof indithe of viduals,regardless theirethnicdescent.The populationistconceptmay provide a base forbio-nationalism involvingan entire nation or a group of nations, in which case racial discriminationconcerns the whole ethnicunit or units. Proposals to rejectthe term"race" and replace it by "ethnicgroup" in thebiological and ecologicalsenseof thisexpression truthby the may be takenforscientific worstkind of racists,i.e., nationalistic.The question should be resolved,not by disregarding this or that scientific conceptof race,but by dispassionatestudyof the action of nonbiological factorsin the historyof mankind. The populationistconcept leads to a certainsceptiof cism about any possibility constructing real intraa specific human taxonomy, particularlyif a greater the amount of independentalleles, determining inherwho is itanceofracial features, assumed.As Kluckhohn, considers such notions as Mediterraneanor Nordic abstractions" typesnothingbut "phenotypicstatistical (1949: 120),pointsout, "It is thelarge numberof genes indeand thefactthey forthemostparttransmitted are of whichexplains the inconsistency the subpendently of groupings mankind."This assumptionof independof of entsorting genesmakesreconstruction theprimary componentsof any human population impossible. observationof reHowever,a simple morphological the cent population samples does not seem to confirm phenotypicalimplicationsof this view. By individual analysisit is still possible to distinguishall the types thathave appeared since at least the Neolithicperiod; theydid not disappear,in spite of the long intrabreeding processthatoccursin any human population. This has by possibility been suggested Vallois (1943),Hooton (1939, 1946), skerlj (1935), Lundman (1952), Briggs regards (1955), and others.Hooton (1946), forinstance, the population of Ancient Egyptas composedof basic Mediterranean stock,Negroid,Armenoid,and Nordic. In his excellentworkon Slovenian racial types, skerl; (1935) distinguished their components, identifying 12

themas Dinaric, Savide, Baltic,Alpine, Nordic,Noric, and Mediterranean, Armenoid,and Northwestern, calculatedtheirfrequencies. The principalassumptionof populationism, that of completely independentcombinationof the genes dea termining set of racial features whichare regardedas taxonomic,is pure a priori speculation requiringgenetic proof.The numberof alleles that mustbe taken into consideration unknown.If it is a large number, is some alleles should be linked,since a limitednumber of chromosomes responsibleonly for independent are Mendelian transmission human genes. Thereforeit of seemspossible to assumeautosomiclinkage,at least for certain alleles that are importantin racial analysis (Wiercin'ski 1958). This linkage would to some extent act in a directionopposite to thatof independentsorting; and rapid genetic equilibrium, in the sense of equal randomdistribution gene frequencies intraof in breedingpopulations,would not be established early as as thesecondgeneration 1955).That thepleiotropic (Li effects a gene also ought to be takeninto account is of suggested by Gates' (1954) work on pigmentation. There may be othermechanisms opposing the purely accidental distributionof phenotypiceffects indeof pendentsortingof genes. It must be remembered that or genetictheories onlyapproximations, even modare els, of a biological realitythat constantly changes.Nor should we forget the fate of the hypotheses connected with the names of Mendel, Morgan,Goldschmidt, and Pontecorvo. Because it is impossibleto calculate the frequencies of the genesdetermining set of classicracial features, a a population can be characterized only by its average type.Consequently, mostpopulationiststudiesoperate withthecomparisons arithmetic of means,standarddeviations, and frequenciesof categoriesof qualitative characters.These comparisonsand descriptionsvery oftenare not estimated statistically, althoughthe work of the Morant School, and Oschinsky's (1954) exhaustive studyof AfricanBantu tribes,formoutstanding have been exceptions. Recently, new classifications based on the distribution blood groups in different of ethnicpopulations (Boyd 1950) to avoid the difficulty of calculatingthe incidenceof genesdetermining traits of formand pigmentation. But seriousobjectionshave been advanced against such schemes.Hooton (1946) maintainedthatsimilarblood group distributions may occurin populationsthatare morphologically quite different. Oschinsky (1954) showed that intraracialblood group distributionamong the-East African Bantomorphs appears to be heterogeneous, while the interracial blood group distributionamong such different groupsas the Nilotomorphs and Congomorphs often is In homogeneous. particularcases,comparisonof blood group distributions may have great value for ethnobut theycannotbe regardedas the geneticconclusions, sole basis forracial classification. For the populationists, therefore, forthe panmixas ionists,the concept of average typeof population remains themain methodological tool fordescriptive and comparativepurposes.This being the case, it is rather hard to understandwhy the average type is not con~ sidered much more a "phenotypicstatisticalabstraction" than are the definitionsof Mediterranean or
CUaREN,T ANTHROPOLOGY

Nordic types established by means of individual diagnosis. The logical and factual inconsistencies of populationist conceptions seem to be more sharply outlined than those ascribed to the individualist concept of race.
THE INDIVIDUALIST CONCEPT OF RACE

Wiercifiski:

RACIAL

ANALYSIS

Anthropologists in several countries-E. A. Hooton, in the U.S.A.; B. Males in Argentina; the von Eickstedt School in Germany; and in Poland both the Czekanowski School and the comparative morphology of I. Michalski-simultaneously evolved the individualistic concept of race. A general summary of this view has been presented by Males (1950-51: 11-13, 20): For me, racial typeis a real thing;race, a taxonomicconsharinga commonorigin,constitute cept.Similarracial types, as a race. . .. The typesare inherited, we shall see, and really existin individuals;race is not.... It is for thisreason that in individuals thereappears a racial type,similar to an inheritablephenotypeof the parents,by means of the genoracial type is for thisreason alone type.... Race, or better, factor.. . . In the a unique, inheritablewhole, a hereditary a hybrid, returnto one of the pure races is produced when actingin the same directionare joined to geneticinfluences factors. the latenthereditary The same concepts, with all their practical taxonomic applications, have been elaborated by the Polish school of physical anthropologists founded by Czekanowski. Its principal assumptions and methodological premises, formulated by Czekanowski, may be brieflysummarized as follows: a characterising given (1) A given set of racial features, by as is racial type, inherited it would be if determined one pair of alleles. of (2) There existtwo categories racial types:racial eleand constantin the heredity mentswhichare homozygotic of process;and mixed typesconsisting only two racial elements. of (3) The formation new elementsis caused mainlyby which is -amongthe mixed types, a processof stabilization of determinedby an unknown interdependence genes. assumption, the frequency distribution From the first of racial types in any human population that is in genetic equilibrium may be established according to what Czekanowski (1928) called the "Law of Frequency of Types." He assumed the presence, in European populations, of four principal racial elements: Nordic (a), Mediterranean (e), Armenoid (X), and Lapponoid (x), the frequences of which could be calculated from his 1, law in the form of the polynomial (a+e+h+1)2= where a+e+h+l 1, denoting the theoretical relative frequencies of the four European racial elements. The calculation is analogous to that inferred from the equations for blood group distribution: (p+q+r)2, - 1. where p+q+r Every human population is composed of a number of racial elements and combinations of these, or mixed types. A single population may consist of different types, and a single type may occur in differentpopulations. Hence, it is possible to establish the racial affinities of individuals, independent of their ethnic origins. Further, this racial analysis should be based on studies of of the racial affinities each individual included-in the population sample being investigated, since its phenoVol. 3 -No. 1 -February1962

If typefully reflects genotype. theracial typeis charits acterizedby a whole set of racial features, typological analysisof the individual cannotbe based on an exambut must involve a set of ination of single characters diagnostictraits. A singletype, course,should include only individof resembleeach otherin a set of uals who phenotypically School has parthe characters. Therefore, Czekanowski ticularlyelaborated methods for segregatingsets of features (Czekanowski1909).For small samples(not exdifferences ceeding60 individuals)themethodoffewest mathemator similarities applied as theconventional is In ical measureof similarity. thiscase, each individual may be regardedas a point in polydimensional space, are wheremetrically expressedcharacters its ordinates. can in The type, thelightof thismethod, be understood of as a place of concentration points in polydimensional space, where the distancesbetween any pair of a points are shortest. This method segregates seriesof data into groups of individuals who are more similar to one anotherin a setofracial features thanto individuals fromthe othergroups.These relationscan be prein of sentedgraphically theform so-called"diagramsof thefewest differences." Hitherto,the best resultsobtained by this method have come fromits application to taxonomicproblems in paleoanthropology(Czekanowski 1909; SteslickaMydlarska1947, 1953; Wiercin'ski 1956, 1959). The application of Czekanowski'smethod to contemporary materialsgives less.satisfactory results,because of the of difficulties selectingthe best diagnosticfeatures and theirtaxonomicalvalue, i.e., theirproper establishing normalization. However,other elaborations,based on the use of diagraphicalmethodsforsmall craniological have allowed Czekanowski's series, colleaguesto achieve thefirst approximatedefinitions racial types. of These were satisfactorily applied to living individuals by T. Henzel (1934), who workedout the Pygmoid problem, distinguishingand describing the Pygmic element. The next step in the developmentof Czekanowski's School was the formulation the so-called "Law of of AnthropologicalArithmeticMean" for the cephalic index (Czekanowski1930),used to controlthe correctof nessof theresults individualracial analysis. This law comprehendsthe relations among the frequenciesof racial elements computedfrom law of frequencies as the of types,theirmean cephalic indices,and the average cephalic index of the population being examined. Its formulais
aMa + eM'P+ hMx + IM = M

where a, e, h, I denote the relativefrequenciesof the European elements;Ma,, Me,M, MA, the cephalic indices of the elements;and M the arithmetic mean of cephalic index of the population, if no relations of dominance or recessiveness between the elementsare assumed. When thedifferences betweenthetheoretically-calculated mean and themean arrivedat empirically not do seemtoo great, results racial analysisare regarded the of as correct. 13

The frequencies of the racial elements are recognized as constituting a description of the population and its racial composition. Thus, comparison of populations made for ethnogenetic purposes were always based on comparisons of their descriptions in the form of racial compositions. The practical elaboration of racial data by the Czekanowski School can be divided into the following stages: of a) Mathematicalsegregation the materialinto groups of individuals resemblingeach other,usually in a set of indices reflecting morphologicalforms. of b) Establishingthe racial affinities the groups so diswith tinguished comparingtheiraverage characteristics by or thoseof alreadyknowntypes, withthe mostcharacteristic individual representatives such types. of c) Calculation of the relative frequenciesof racial elements,on the basis of the frequenciesof distinguished fromthe law types, resolving by partial equationsresulting of frequency types. of d) Control of individual analysisby application of the law of anthropological arithmetic mean forcephalic index. These four operations were followed by an attempt to establish the position of the investigated sample in time and space-i.e., a comparison of its racial composition with the compositions of other populations whose ethnogenetic relation is more or less close. Especially after World War II, however, almost all the theoretical concepts of the Czekanowski School, as well as their applications, have been subject to severe criticism. The arguments of the critics may be summarized as follows: a) The existingapplications of the law of frequencies of types have not been properly verified statistically (Debetz and Ignatiev 1938; Ethnogenetical Conference 1955), and the empiricallyobserved frequenciesof racial elementsare usually smaller than would have been theoreticallyexpected. b) The-published racial diagnosesoften contradictthe consequence; i.e., an principal assumptionof systematic does not correspond with the individual'sset of characters accepted definitionof taxonomic units (Michalski 1949; Henzel and Michalski1955;Wiercifiski 1955; Kapica 1958). mean, when c) The law of anthropologicalarithmetic does not provide sufformulatedfor only one character, and ficient control because it maygivea good fit withother, solutions for racial compositions. different, of of d) The assumption heredity racial typeas a monomericfeatureis too simple,and too farfromthe observed reality. e) The taxonomicvalue of a few indices was overestidescriptive characters. mated at the expense of important The opponents of the Czekanowski School have especially criticized the formalized mathematization of taxonomic analysis. This criticism gave rise to the socalled Comparative Morphological School founded by I. Michalski. But this criticism,severe as it is, does not imply rejection of all the principal ideas formulated during the firstphase of the Polish School's development. Concepts that have been preserved as useful methodological tools include: the individual analysis of racial data; the description of population in form of racial composition; and the law of anthropological arithmeticmean, when formulated formany characters. The diagraphical method of fewest differencescan be applied to all comparisons of the racial composition of 14

different populations,because in this case thereis no objectionto thestatistical of homogeneity thedata. The meaningof racial composition been changedby the has adoption of methodsforits computationindependent of the assumptions thelaw of frequency types. of of The first important step in attainingproper understandingof the taxonomicdifferentiation a populaof tion was Michalski's (1949) elaboration of data from the military anthropometric of survey Poland. Michalski establishedthe supposed racial affinities 36,532 of individuals,besides thoseof 117 Lusatians, 196 Serbs, 60 265 Lapps, 226 Norwegians, Welsh, and 45 Gypsies. His method,thatof so-calleddifferential was diagnosis, very simple, but fruitful. The preliminary analytical procedure is based on simple morphologicalobservation of the individualsexamined,who are grouped accordingto the similarities and differences thus distinguished.Then followsthe laboriousprocessof delimiting racial typesby the use of differential diagnosticsi.e., assigningindividuals to typesin such a way as to give a compactdefinition any given type.The indifor viduals assignedto a giventypeshould showa common constellation characteristics. example,if a center of For of Alpine typeis distinguished which is composed of individuals characterized dark pigmentation, then by all individuals with light pigmentationmust be excluded fromthistype.The individual analysisof many populationsis usuallyfacilitated pre-existing knowlby edge about the centersof crystallization the types. of Many of the definitions that Deniker obtained by the cartographic method,like thedefinitions elaboratedby the CzekanowskiSchool, provided much information about the taxonomicdifferentiation European popuof lations. Michalski therefore refinedthe older descriptionsofracial elements and their mixed types, establishing strictlimitsforindividual variability withina set of characters. These investigations provideda basis for a kindof systematic in theform strict key, of definitions of the types observedin Poland. It is possibleto classify each inhabitantof Poland accordingto his set of such principalcharacteristic features stature, as cephalic index, total facial index, nasal index, nasal profile, hair and eyecolor,and form upper-eyelid. of Independently of the Polish data, Michalskiworkedout and carefully analyzeddata on Chinese (1938), Sikh (1939), and Congolese (1957) populations, as well as many othersfor which his resultsremain unpublished. In thisway he obtainedfirm definitions 16 racial elements of from the three great varieties of mankind, white, yellow and black (Table 9). Nowhere in the world has so much materialbeen studiedindividuallyin a seriousattempt to describedistinct racial types. The generaltheoretical resultof Michalski'sresearch is the discovery the actual, phenotypic of existenceof morphological types which may, be divided into (1) thoseshowingmoreor less extreme combinations of characteristics which are called "racial elements" or simply"races;" and (2) typeswith intermediate positionsbetweentwoor moreelements thewhole set of in features. concrete As examplesmaybe cited thedescriptionsof averagesobtained forthe Dinaric type,which is intermediate betweenArmenoidand Nordic; or for theSubnordictype(themain component Polish popof ulation) whichis conceivedof as being composedof the
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

V
cd 0 C'3 0 o >- aj A b-0 clj .4 N N I---0 'A En o 0 W r. aj r-i > 1, :Rn 'Cni In 'o 0 0 cJ 4) u 0 0 cli cli -0 . w IL) 4 - rbiD 0 o w 4) IL) 0 4. 0 U W U "In v $., In v cli > In Cj u t) W r. id cd - = .CIJ X biD C'j En ,w cli 0 C'J biD 0 4) v > C'J 0 0 o C-d 0 b; C,3 C,3 .3 C,3.C.) bo 0 V IL) IL) o L cli 14 = 0 w tl;4 -0 >0 cli -U cli 10 0 IL) W w M C'3 C13 aj Cd Z v C,3> v 0

> Cd

aX W : r.
0 0

C13bo -

0 u V 2
v 0 C'3 0 0 > .0 > biD cli > ho 0 42, u 0 w cl C'3 O 79) .0 .-v C13 In N N bo V 0 In V .cJ 4.)

0 CJ
I-

0 r. 'o cli
cli In 0 4 cli

C'i
> 0 m 0
biD-cli

Cd 0 0 U 0 423 _ W v C,3 > W v aj C13

>
C13 s. U =

-'A

Ca

li v
> 0 0

C13

C13 .0 43

zo:

o 0
0 R > cli cli u C's I.. u ho biD cli 0 0 0 0 0 CIJ a .p 'n 4) cd IL) cli > cli 0 4-, coli C'j > U - .cj cli cd 0 biD u 0 0 0 biD 0 w w 0 biD w

w CIJ o

-0C'i 0 0
0 cli - r.
>, w

44
4) 0 >, 4 v C', C, 0 W CJ clt 0 S., 4) C'i > cli :z !2 bo -cli > b, 0 u 0 0 0 r0 M 0 v > In o v 0 C, -CJ-v,4 v In .0 bo w 2 0 x w V v > bo bo bo 0 'a v 0 C w C'Jw c'j In C'i u b 0 0 0 -CJ aj W In 03 cli cli 0 In 0, :1 o 0 > In In w 0 4. 0 N 0 CIJ -14 > 0 0 CIJ > En cli 0 ho -CJ C, C,3 0 IL) v cli Cld u No

clj
clio Z
bjC,0

C's 0 aj
CJ CIJIn C
bjD r, 0 $-. V CIJ

00 0
>
0 4-, 0 w In0 u 'v 0 biD

0
0 0 -CJ -Z
0 In ::5 In 0 > - 44, 0 cli RI

cli 0 V
>

cli cli

'A o

t cli 0 0
cli

'o 0

cli m CIJ 4) 0

CIJ 0 v
bjD': C'J clj

C' aj C'i 7a

0
cJ u 0

.0 4
biD

.0

Xi w u r. w 0
0
v U .-m , 0 0 Ww biD biD 0 cli in, biD0 . > V 0 m 'n w i-. > 4 >1 cli 4) 4) cli ..A . 0 cli >

4) CIJ
03

03 0

0 ' W, "&. $... C,3$_. Cj 0 cli clj o 0 cli 0 CIJ C'i 0 4) 4) .D 0 cli W ho cli cli cli XI m 0 ou 0 0 0 > m Cj r. 0 U w > >u cli > r. E 0 U ho bjD 0 0 > M >, W C'J > CJ cli 0 CIJbf).CIJ t) 0 > biD CJ >1 0 > m > m > cli 0 > 0 C'i >,.b > C,3 CJ , 0 > 2 cli > cli > r. 0 0 Cj biD N biD cli bo Lr. 0 cli cli cli u C,3 C'i 0 biD 4) 0 0 0 0 u U 2 cli o

0
0

0 U CJ Cj

V aj > 0 CIJ M > cli 0 > y cli u >1 > C's 0 0 C) LO C j_.q 0 0 0 0 I 0 r, biD 0$4 0 00 00 C, cli > cli cn 00 00 cn 00 00 00 0 o 0 0 cli 0 W 0 cJ S. r, ho 4) 0 cli 0 0 0 cli 0 _0 0 0 0 0 blD blD 0 0 o cli 0 W 0 0 o cli 0 blD 0 0 o cli 0 IbiD 00 0 0 'O .0 - CIJ 0 biD 0 .0 cli 0 0 cJ 0 03 0 biD 0 cli cli cli 0 0 0 4) -4) biD-5 Z biD 4) - 0 0 > CIJ cJ 0 0 ho 0 $... 0 > ho e 0 > (ZN tn 0

0 0
bD M

o
0

cli

vj r. biD 0

rj z O? 00 00 cq O? >4

00

cn 00

cn 00

cn 00

cn O?

00

C,] 00

CA 00

CA 00 .2 biD C,3

C 00

cq O? x

LO 00 O? C 00

lo:0 0 0 IL) ZO 0 0 I 1>1 ho "_ IL) IL) OD 0 4

cq

'o U " 2'O biD 4)0 >1

10 0 0 biD 0 5 0 0 0 IL) biD 0 10 t 0 biD 0 biD 0 0 U o bo 0 IL) IL)

zo: IL)

0 0 IL)

oor

\0

00

LO

LO

LO

oo bD >, > C's C's

C's

00 bD >1 .- N
C'S

00 bD .- >
C's

00 bD bD
C'S C's C's

k.. W w 0 z 0 C's C's

44 0.4

bD > C,, C's > N C'S N > >

UO >1 bD

bD
C's

W > cS ho cS .-

bD c,.3.

W C's

0 0

> C's

CA 0; 0;

$. C's

LO C C 0 >1 0 >1

c1r)

pq

to CIS

bD

C's

0 C) 0 C'S .- =
0

bD .-0 o
bO

CIS

s. C'S

._ En - :Z
bO

C's

C's C's 0
W

oe
0

C'sx : CIS C'S

En

>, 4.)

C'sx C's
w

4.) g: 0

cl

0 En >,

C'S

0 En >,
C's

C's> .
In

4) bO

t >,

-0 s.

C's

C's

$.

TABLE

4-THE

COMPARISON FOR SOME INTERMEDIATE TYPES

Characteristic Stature Cephalic Index Nasal Index' Profile of Nose Eye Color' Hair Color

ArmenoidDinaric Nordic SubnordicLapponoid LL AA AL HH AH 165.3 86.9 61.0 84.8 4.4 59.0 166.7 85.9 87.7 61.4 57.9 6.0 52.6 171.0 80.9 91.1 60.8 65.0 13.4 25.0 165.8 84.6 66.9 86.1 51.2 11.4 35.8 161.6 86.1 80.1 76.4 43.6 4.3 55.9

Total Facial Index 86.3

based on esisshould be tested propergeneticanalysis by morematerial. Otherinteresting results have been obtainedbystudies of the distribution combinationsof threecateof gories of fivediagnosticfeatures(Wanke, 1952, 1953, in1954).It has been assumedthattheseare distributed dependently each other,if the empirically-obtained on frequencies individualsbelongingto a given combiof nation of categories classicindicesand pigmentation of of hair and eyesdo not differ fromthe thesignificantly calculatedaccordingto thefolloworeticalexpectations ing equation:
LtS1 s2*

where Lt denotes theoreticalfrequency;s", the frequency of individuals showing the categoryof n-feaNordic and Lapponoid elements(Table 4). The inter- ture; and m, the total number of individuals in the mediate position of the hypotheticalmixed types is Wanke's extensive sample investigated. research, using meansare not understood follows:if theirarithmetic as data obtained fromPoles, shows clear and significant in strictly the middle, at least theydo not exceed the in surplusesover theoretical expectations combination limitsof individual variabilityof the racial elements. ofracial features well as characteristics bodybuild. of as however,theirpositionin a majority It is of greatinterest Most frequently, thatthesurplusesappeared at the is of characteristics more or less intermediate. places of normallyextremeassociations,roughlycorof It has been observedthattheoffspring parentswho arrivedat by to responding the descriptions previously belong to the same racial elementbelong only to their Polish anthropologists. Wanke's resultshave been exparents'element;an example is providedby one of the cellently corroborated H. and Z. Szczotka(1959),who by Polish familiesstudied by Michalski (Table 5, Family obtained a closercorrespondence the surpluseswith of No. 1). If the parents show affinities intermediate the morphologically-distinguished to racial elements, disbut may exhibit different, types,then their offspring coveringeven a so-called Cromagnoidelement that is logical, combinationsof the supposed componentsof rare in Poland. These investigations still in their are in the parents;or even a reconstruction, the whole set to infancy, because it is necessary establishaccurately of characteristics, the presumedracial elementhid- the places of the divisionsof featuresinto more cateof den in the parentalforms. the gories.Nevertheless, methodof Wanke provesthat This situation changes when the series of families the distribution sets of racial characters populain of descend from hybridizationamong major varieties. tionsis linked,rather thandiscrete. The racial elements Typological analysisof Rodenwaldt's(1928) seriesfrom as revealed by individual morphological diagnostics from RehoKisar,Indonesia,and Fischer's(1913) series, the are, statistically, places of significant surpluses. both, South Africa,has allowed us to inferthe concluHowever subjective the method of morphological of sion about a greater diversity intermediatetypes individual diagnosis may seem, the results obtained (Wiercinski1958). It could be proved that 30-50% of with it by different authorsare almost identical,since of the individualsfromtheseseriesshowfeatures three the same definitions typeare accepted. This is best of racial elements.The hypothesis illustrated comparingaverage characteristics the or more hypothetical by of features determined several, at thatdiagnostic are or by racial types distinguishedby Michalski (1949) and least two, groups of linked seriesof genes, which has Wich (1959). The veryslightdifferences show how obbeen advanced to explain this phenomenon(Wiercin- jective the methodis (Table 6). ski 1958),may also in part account forthe inheritance Successful have also been made at approachattempts of But hypoth- ing thebiologicalreality thetypes defined ofconstellations characters. thisworking of as through
TABLE
5-THE TYPOLOGICAL FAMILY DATA

'as arithmetizedby I. Michalski (1949).

mn-1

Sn

Family No. 1 Character Father Mother Children Father

Family No. 145 Mother Children

1. Cephalic Index 2. Total Facial Index 3. Nasal Index 4. Eye Color 5. HairColor' 6. Racial Type

80.7 92.0 51.6 14 16 AA

82.9 86.8 66.0 16 13 AA

78.6 90.6 64.7 14 14 AA

79.5 92.3 60.3 14 10 AA

80.0 100.7 51.7 15 15 AA

85.0 83.7 69.4 5 5 HL

89.4 90.2 57.0 15 9 AL

87.5 80.9 72.7 5 6 LL

86.3 80.6 78.3 8 5 AL Subnordic

All Nordics 'Hair coloras arithmetized WierciAski by (1958).

16

Alpine Subnordic Lapponoid

CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY

withmeticmeansare computedforsinglemetrictraits, theirwhole set. They are statistical out characterizing of abstractions phenotypicfacts; and are not able to of and describethediversity variability thepopulations sampled,especiallyif theseare more complicatedand polymodal.The sameholdsfortheuse ofstandarddeviwhich mightsupplyboth of these ations. Information EXAMPLES OF THE APPLICATIONS OF measuresfora population are reduced to the statistical RACIAL DATA TO ETHNOGENESIS and more-or-less artificial abstract pictureof theaverage Full and accurate evaluation of the populationist phenotypeof a population and its range of variability treatedas theindividual one. Many of themetriccharand individualistapproaches is made difficult lack by comparmethodprevent of information about thegenetic mechanisms determin- actersused in the average-type ison betweenosteologicaland livingmaterials. ing the inheritance most racial characteristics. of But condition-i.e.,accurateand uniform Only thefourth therelativevalue of theseconcepts and methods maybe of populations of comparability descriptions different assessedfrom theirapplicability thetracing ethnoto of -can be fulfilled the averagetypemethod.Its pracby geneticprocesses. in problemsmay be ilThe application of racial data to ethnogenetic prob- tical effectiveness ethnogenetic lustratedby the comparativestudies of Morant and lems requires exact, detailed descriptionsof human of populations and objective methodsfor theircompari- otherswho use the Coefficient Racial Likeness. An example is the studyof a seriesof Oriental crania by in timeand space. son The ethnogenetic goal thus remains a phenotypic Woo and Morant (1932), who obtained a division into fourgroupsof the whole ethnicseries,coveringa vast of description a population in regardto a whole set of Siberia and Inarea extendingfromIndia to northern taxonomic features.The problem is only how to deconclusionsare almost nil. donesia. The ethnogenetic scribematerialso as to approach the geneticstructure of a population as closely as possible. The following Anotherexampleis Morant's(1925) paper on Egyptian conclusionis populations.Morant'sgeneraltypological conditionsshould be fulfilled: that the Egyptian population from Predynasticto shouldbe basedon thewholesetof a) The description types, Christiantimesconsistedof two closely-related characteristics recognized with taxonomic value; Upper and Lower Egyptian,whose gradual mingling The method description of shouldincludeas much b) of information possible as aboutthestructure thepopula- comprisesthe basic racial history Egypt.This does of not agree with the historicalreality,which was very tion; c) It should make possible exact the comparison osteo- complex and included manyimmigrations of fromdifferlogical and living material; ent areas. Somewhatbroaderconclusionswere reached d) Accurate uniform and comparison thedescriptions by one of Morant's followers, Batrawi (1950), who of A. ofdifferent in populations time spaceis necessary. and that the mass of modernEgyptianpopulation suggests The methods of descriptionused in populationist is homogeneous, differbecause it showsno significant theorydo not seem superiorto the individualistcon- ences in blood group distributions arithmetic or means cept in fulfilling these conditions.Most populationist of head and bodymeasurements. Here, again, the comstudiesthatdeal with the problemsof ethnogenesis are of plex history AncientEgyptleftno traceon theracial based on theapplicationof arithmetic mean and stand- data workedout by the averagetypemethod. ard deviationas theonlykind of description a popuof applicabilityof the Summarizingthe ethnogenetic lation; and only a few of them use any statistical the points test methodsof populationisttheories, following of significance estimatingthe differences for between may be noted: the averagesof the populations compared. The aritha description method, representing a) The average-type
TABLE
Character Type
6-COMPARISON OF RACIAL TYPES DISTINGUISHED BY MICHALSKI AND WICH

individual analysis.The raciologicalinvestigations on tubercular individuals from the Lodz District have shown the selectivevalue of certaintypes.In Poland, the Mediterraneanand Armenoidelements,and their intermediate derivates-i.e.,the componentsof Southern origin-seem to have been mostlyeliminated by tuberculosis thelungs (T. W. Michalski1956). of

Wiercifiski:

RACIAL

ANALYSIS

Dinaric (AH) Ml WS

Subnordic (AL) M W

Baltic (YL) M W

Northwestern(AE) M W

Stature Cephalic Index Total Facial Index Nasal Index Eye Color Hair Color
2J.

166.7 85.9 87.7 61.4 6.0 dark

167.6 84.0 89.5 62.6 11.4 dark

165.8 86.1 84.6 66.9 11.4 lighter

169.8 85.3 85.7 62.7 11.2 lighter

167.5 80.4 80.6 76.0 11.4 lighter

16S.1 79.3 79.6 75.7 12.5 lighter

166.8 80.6 90.0 62.9 10.0 dark

169.3 79.8 91.8 61.6 10.4 dark

1 I. Michalski (1949), Lodz. Wich (1959),Wroclaw. 17

Vol. 3 No. 1 -February 1962

of the abstract, averagetypeof the investigated population, gives minimal information aboutitsracialstructure. b) It can operateonlywithmetric characteristics, thus omitting important descriptive features. c) It depends, a great to extent, theamount indion of vidualdata,especially thecaseofsmall in series. d) It makesthe comparison osteological living of and material very difficult. The only positively usefulcharacteristic the averof age-type methodin ethnogenesis itsprovision exact is of comparabilityof homogeneous materials in metric characteristics when statistically estimated. The methods of the individualist concept of race avoid thesedrawbacks. A descriptionof any human population is represented by its racial composition, which is an abbreviated formof the distribution phenotypes of described by the whole set of features, both metricand descriptive. The extremes variabilityfor constellations of of in characters reflected the formof racial elements; are are expressedby and medially-oriented constellations is their This statement valid relationsto theseextremes. forindividual morpho-diagnostics well as forthe soas called "reference pointsmethod"ofWanke (1953). The simplestsituationis a population belongingwhollyto one greatvariety. has been observedthat,in thiscase, It a considerable majority of the observable mediallysituated constellations described may be satisfactorily by the features only two elements.The initial charof acteristics the distribution constellations charof of of acters can be presentedin the formof their relative frequencies (so-calledtypological composition).At this of stage of descriptiona strictcomparability populations is already assured (Szczotkaand Szczotka 1959), about phenotypic variabiland thelevel of information ityis higherthan thatprovidedby use of the averagetypemethod.But, because the numberof typesdistinguished is usually large, it seems more economical to intoaccounttheprobability the simplify picture, taking of some distortion. This can be done by reducingthe typologicalcompositionto the racial one, expressing the entirediversity the population only in termsof of itsextremes. maybe assumed,then,thatintermediate It typesare composedof extremes, of racial elements i.e., in equally-proportioned relations.In the end, a population is describedby-the hypothetical relativefrequencies of its racial elements, which are computedon the basis of typologicalcompositionaccordingto the followingequation:
a$

populations in time and space, an additional assumption is needed-namely, that a racial element distinguishedin one population is raciallyequivalent to this same elementin anotherpopulation.For example,indiin viduals fromItaly and Poland, corresponding their of morphological habitusto thedefinition the Mediterranean element,must be assigned to it regardlessof theirethnicorigin.This means thatindividualssharing a commonphysicalhabitus,thoughfound in different moresimilarthanotherinpopulations,are genetically dividualsin theirown population who differ markedly in a set of characters. The applicationof themethodsof individualistconcepts gives fruitful results in resolvingethnogenetic problems.A generalexample is Czekanowski's (1948b) of In synthesis Slavic ethnichistory. his elaborationof Neolithic seriesfromPoland, Kapica (1958) analyzed, by theuse of individualmorpho-diagnostics, series four of crania from different culturesand sites.The highincidence (70%) of representatives the Yellow variety of in and of White-Yellow intermediates thecranial material fromthe Painted Ware culture(Bilcze Ztote) confirms Eurasiatic connections the for hypothesized this culture.The seriesfromCorded Potteryculture sites of seem to have a structure characteristic steppe peothe possibilityof its pre-Indoples, which reinforces European originin the regionsnorthof the Black Sea, as Childe (1926),amongothers, maintained. The unique of character the Bell-Beakercultureis corroborated by admixtures Armenoidand Berbericracial eleof strong its ments,which confirm southernorigin,primarily in WesternAsia. The stronginfluenceof the Nordic element in Mierzanowice(transitional between the Neolithic and Bronze Ages) suggeststhe possibilitythat Northern and WesternEuropean immigrants mixed in Poland withpeoples of a morearchaicEurasiaticbackground (Table 7). The typologicalanalysisof all the Neolithic series published by Kapica has been controlledby the law of anthropological arithmetic mean fornine indices(Table 8). Michalski's (1957) carefulracial analysis of natives TABLE 7-THE
NEOLITHIC RACIAL COMPOSITION OF SERIES OF CRANIA FROM POLAND (AFTER Z. KAPICA 1958).

NS +

2N1 +

+
1

2N,_
E. .
eg Q

if

aL+a2+...+ax

where n, denotes the absolute frequency element of XX; a, the relativefrequency elementXX in racial of composition;n0, x-1, the absolute frequencyof the intermediate typebetweenelementXX and X- 1; and N, themassof thesample. If populations are composed of hybridsdescended fromdifferent greatvarieties, thereoccursa greaterdeformation racial composition, of whichmaybe avoided by more carefulanalysisof the types,takinginto consideration features morethantworacial elements. the of For comparison theracial compositions different of of
18

Nordic(a) Cromagnonoid (y) Berberic (b) Mediterranean (e) Armenoid (h) Lapponoid (l) Mongoloid(i) Highland(q)

27.5 12.5 2.5 17.5

_

15.4 19.2 19.2

-

2.5
2.5

35.0
CURRENT

19.2 7.7 19.2

8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 16.7 16.7

8.3

27.5 20.0 2.5 20.0

-

5.0
-

25.0

25.0

ANTHROPOLOGY

TABLE

8-APPLICATION

OF THE

LAW

OF ANTHROPOLOGICAL

ARITHMETIC KAPICA

MEAN

TO THE

POLISH

NEOLITHIC

SERIES

ANALYSED

BY

Z. HeightLength HeightBreadth

(1958). Total Facial Upper Facial K. Upper Facial V. Orbital Nasal

Index

Cephalic

FrontoParietal

Empirical
Arithmetic Mean Theoretical Mean 75.7 75.3 73.8 73.2 97.9 97.3 69.5 69.6 89.4 89.5 51.6 51.6 71.3 71.4 77.4 77.9 49.8 49.1

Difference

+0.4

+0.6

+0.6

-0.1

-0.1

0.0

-0.1

-0.5

+0.7

from Kwilu basin,Congo,distinguished the admixtures of the White variety the formof Berberic,Mediterin ranean and Orientalelements. This has made some importantethnogenetic inferences possible: The Berberic componentwas connectedwith the Mangbetu expanreflects laterEuropean admixsion; the Mediterranean ture fromthe Portuguesecolonies; while the Oriental componentcorresponds Arab influences. to Debetz (1930) analyzed,bymeansof themodified dia59 crania graphicmethod of Czekanowski, prehistoric several fromthenorthern Baikal region,distinguishing seemveryregular,althoughhis types His results types. The are not as uniform requiredin Polish raciology. as upper basin of the Lena and Angara riversappears to with have been occupiedbya type whichis identified A, a so-called "Paleosibiric" type with Mongoloid affiniof ties.There werealso concentrations Europoid admixtures related to a Cromagnoid element (types B-D), demonstrating connectionsbetween the veryearly inSiberia and Europoid eneolithic habitantsof northern the and Altai regions.The populationsfrom Minusinsk Eskimoid typeprevailed in the Middle Angara basin. Such resultscould not have been obtained if the material had been describedin terms its averagetype.In of thiscase, it probablywould have been classed as a new taxonomicunit,called "Pre-Baikalrace" or something verysimilar. Anotherexample is the workof L. C. Briggs(1955), whose individual analysis of prehistoric crania from northwest Africa has shown the heterogeneity the of "Mechta type."Briggshas distinguished fourtypes(A, B, C, D), whichcan be correlated withdifferent immigrations.Type A, called "Palaeo-Mediterranean," representsan archaic stratumof Paleolithic origin in Africa. This was followedby an immigration typeB of ("African Mediterranean"),of Near Eastern descent, whichwas perhapsaccompaniedby the brachycephalic typeC ("AfricanAlpine"). Type D seemsto be a mixture of the first three,a local product to which ultimately maybe applied theterm, "Mechta-Afalou type." The ethnogenetic data obtained by Briggssurelyexceeds thatwhichwould be expectedfrom merely calculating severalarithmetic means forthe whole seriesof crania. Only a veryfew examples fromthe vast literature have been cited to illustrate greatpossibilities the that individualracial analysisoffers ethnogenetic to studies. However,theyseemenough to provethesuperiority of the individualistconceptby comparison with the average-type method.
Vol. 3 *No. 1 *February1962

CONCLUSION trendsin racial anthropolThe analysisof different which,to be ogy leads to certaingeneral conclusions, as shouldincludegeneralprinciples well as mostuseful, studyand discussion.These may for hypotheses further as briefly follows: be presented observableempiricalfactsare thepheno1. The first typesof individuals. Therefore,any taxonomyof hushould be based on an analysisof the simiman forms revealed by actual individuals laritiesand differences This features. by characterized a whole setofdiagnostic of analysisshould be followedby investigation thebioof contents the genetic)and statistical logical (especially This seems phenotypictypesthat were distinguished. to be themostempiricalway to achievea racial classification withoutneedlessa priorispeculations. stepstowardthisgoal have alreadybeen 2. The first taken by racial anthropologyin Poland, which has elaboratedmethodsforthe individual analysisof pheThese methodsshould be applied to all series notypes. different regionsand periodsof time.Bioof data, from typesin researchon well-defined logical and statistical Poland has begun,and its initial resultsseem to prove of the applicabilityand efficacy individual diagnosis. 3. Individual analysisshould lead to distinguishing, in any population sample, the groups of individuals physical habitus. with a common, well-differentiated of The characteristics such groupsare comparablewith thoseof the verysimilargroups thathave been distinguished in otherpopulations.The resultsobtained in different populationsshould be presentedin a kind of key to ensure the objective conventional systematic in elaborations. effects all further series 4. The individual racial analysis of different of the suggests existenceof two categories racial types types. and (b) mixedor intermediate (a) racialelements; at A racial elementshould fulfill, least,the following conditions: mustshow to assigned a racialelement a) The individuals of extreme constellations characters; promust to belonging thesameracialelements b) Parents sameelement; to belonging this duceoffspring be must a within racialelement variability c) The individual which derivatives by lessthanthat shown itsintermediate hold only (This wouldprobably elements. include other components different formixedtypes of consisting very does dominance notoccur.) where The mixed types show positions intermediatebeParentswho are astweentwo or moreracial elements.
19

signedto mixed types whichare mayproduce offspring dissimilarto themselves, do not reveal the compobut nentswhichhave been supposed in the mixed typesof the parents. All theseconditionsoughtto be verified thebasis on of pure empiricalfacts. 5. The most informative descriptionof the racial structure any population is its compositionin the of form therelativefrequencies racial elements. is of It of a summaryway of simultaneouslyrepresenting the phenotypic diversity and variability sets of features of in a population. The accurate comparison of differencesand similarities racial compositions timeand of in space by use of Czekanowski's diagraphicalmethod of fewest differences offers very a good tool forresearch on of ethnogenetic processes.The correctness individual racial analysismay be controlledby applyingthe law

of anthropologicalarithmeticmean, formulatedfor characteristics. diagnostic manyimportant conceptof race does not contra6. The individualist assumptionof populadict the generalmethodological of tionism thatthebestdescription a populationshould of be presentedin the formof the relativefrequencies The main theodiagnosticfeatures. genes determining betweentheconceptslies in the applireticaldifference cation of the term,"racial type." In the individualist concept,"racial type"is used in its classicsense,to denote a group of individuals who are phenotypically of regardless their similarin the whole set of features, ethnicorigin.In the populationistconcept,racial type is identifiedwith intrabreedingpopulations. At the present time, the individualist concept seems to be more informativeand based less on a priori principles.

Comments
By A. A. ABBIE* At the outset,I must confessthat I find Wiercitiski'sargument on "race" versus"ethnicgroup" ratherconfusing. As he points out, "race" was originally a purely biological termof reasonable validitybut fell into disreputebecause The of itsmisusein ethnologicaltheory. substitute,"ethnic group," was introobjecduced to avoid this scientifically tionable application. Now, however, argues that "ethnic group" Wiercifiski, is more likelyto perpetuatethe horrors of "racism;" but the veryfactthateven has Wiercifiski to use theterm"racism," whichwas begottenof "race," indicates obnoxious that thereis still something -in "race." Provided "ethnic group" is biological term, employed as a strictly it escapes that objection. At all events, should be it is clear that some effort in made to introduce uniformity this sortof nomenclature. stressesthe Wiercifiski Very rightly, difficultiesattendant upon accurate "racial" determination,but I cannot see that he improvesthe situation by the various separatingand contrasting methodsemployedso farand diagnostic selectingonly one of them for special today find favour. Environmentalists support in the fact that the environimmentdoes play a part in modifying portant physical characters,e.g. head etc.; and disease can also stature, form, play a part, as where malaria may influence the incidence of so esoteric a genetic factor as sickle-call anaemia. Obviously,too, panmixia is an importo tant contributor ethniccomposition, especially in the Old World: "racial" of analysisconsistsalmostentirely sorting out the various elementsconcerned therewould hardly -without admixture be any problem of ethnic diagnosis. 20

whichis essentially And populationism, geneticsso faras I can see, providesthe major factor upon which the whole destructureof ethnic differentiation pends. The author's solution is "individualism,"the comparisonof (presumably) significantgroups of physical But these,in fact,must decharacters. pend upon the effectsof heredity, so and interbreeding, we environment, are, then,simplysummingup the outpanmixia, come of environmentalism, and populationism.Surelythe best approachis to take themall intoaccountwhich Wiercifiskiin truth attemptswhile tryingto ensure that no one of to them is overemphasised the neglect of the others. Wiercifiskisuggestsa mathematical decision on "race" based upon compuof frequency tation of the hypothetical its racial elements.So far so good; but the if I interepret him correctly "racial elements"used in the computationcan be selected-perhaps quite arbitrarilyto suit some particularsituation.This seems to carry inherent dangers and could racially ally peoples living in regionsand neverrelated widelydiverse at all; much the same could be said for some purelygenetical analyses,too, as Bielicki points out. Bielicki'spaper, indeed, does criticise points in dea numberof Wiercifiski's tail, and in the main I findmostof his he valid; in particular, takes comments cognizance of the possibilityof variation in time and space of such physical charactersas head form.His emphasis upon analysis of clustersor constellahas tionsof physicalcharacters thesame scheme aim as Wiercifiski's underlying and, of course,is just a formalway of doing what most physical anthropologistsattemptto do anyway.Nevertheless, in advocatingWanke's method of component frequency analysis, even Bielicki withthe precautionssuggested,

seemsto run thesameriskas Wierciiiski of introducing an arbitraryelement into his calculations.Wierciiiski's characters,at least,are real, while Bielicki's components "do not represent anything real" and "mustnot be conceivedof as biological compositions." Bielicki's comments on Australian aborigines are open to question. He states (p. 5) that "a combination of dark skin, wavy hair, and heavy brow ridgesas an over-allpopulation characteristic unique; it occursonly in Ausis tralia; and it is thisparticularcombination of features thatdistinguishes these Australian populations fromall other livingpopulations."This makesno provision for the fact that in practically any Australiantribeof 300 or so members one can finda range of hair from quite straightto deeply curled, and brow ridges vary from very heavy to completelyabsent in adult males. It would seem thatif ethnicgroupsare to be reduced to statistical abstractions that have no counterpartin reality, then the schemessuggested have no advantages over the more prosaic "arithmetrical mean-range of variationstandarddeviation" approach. I should add also that an extensive surveyof aborigines right across the Australian continent has so far conspicuously failed to disclose the physical differences that Birdsell's"trihybrid theory" demands. The Australian aborigines are, indeed, an exceptionally homogeneous people. As a biologistrather than a mathematician I tend to mistrust purely or even mainly mathematicalsolutionsto or biological problems. Rightly wrongly I believe that mathematicsis only a tool-a valuable one no doubt-that must find its proper place by natural selection among the other tools available forethnicdiagnosis;but to elevate mathematics the role of sole arbiter to
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

in this field would mark a complete retreat from reality livingmatter. the of Mathematicsmay verywell be the maof jor factorin assessment museummaterial, and in the happy circumstance thatthelivinganimal is unlikelyto rear its ugly head to confound the theorist. But when it comes to dealing with living people the importance of mathematicsseemsto wane considerably. The fieldworkerfindshimselfdealing with vital individuals who are, in the ultimate analysis,the only reality; and in spite of the factthatas individualsthey conform to no calculated norm they continue, nevertheless,to live, grow, and reproducetheirkind to the confusion of all theories. [Adelaide,Australia, 27.7.611 By TADEUSZ BIELICKIr The wholeidea of Wiercixiski's article seems to me at variance with what are generallyregardedas the fundamental achievementsof the past 3 decades in the field of evolutionarytheory,taxonomy,and genetics. Exactly 30 years ago an outstanding geneticist led to say that"systematic was biologyin general and physicalanthropologyin particularhave pursued their course with a serenityunimpaired by the results of experimental investigation. This is perhapsbecause geneticists have courteouslyrefrainedfrom commenting on the devastating consequences of their discoveries"(Hogben 1931; quoted from Boyd 1950: 78). Much has changed since the time these words were written.Geneticistsare no longersilent: in the late thirties and in the fortiestheybecame so irritatedby what was going on in physicalanthropology that they finally (and fortunately) dropped the habit of "courteously refraining from comment." Furthermore,during those 30 years geneticsitselfhas made immenseprogresstowarda clear understanding the of nature of species and race; it has become obvious that,if human taxonomy is to possess any scientific sense at all, the Mendelian population ratherthan the individual must be regardedas the elementaryunit of racial variation. It mightseem,therefore, in 1961 that an anthropologybased on "individual racial diagnosis" should no longer be able "to pursue its course with serenity;" in fact,one mightexpect that it should have died a natural death long ago. Yet it not only is alive, but-as demonstrated Wiercihiski's by articleconsidersitselfin excellent health. In Poland, at anyrate,it stillpersists the in formof a large,veryvigorous,and virtuallyunopposedschool,completely immune to all ideas advanced by "the new physicalanthropology"in the West. Vol. 3 -No. 1 February1962

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY

OF RACE

I think that two factorsare responsible forthispeculiar stateof affairs in Polish anthropology. First, the typological systemdeveloped by J. Czekanowskiand his "Lwow School" during the 1920's seemed (and probably was) more sophisticatedthan most researchproceduresused at that time by human raciologists outside Poland. Czekanowski's"differential diagnosis" is undoubtedly ingenioustechan nique of detectingsub-groups withina group of objects characterized a set by of continuous traits,though it is not completely objective (the finalarrangementofobjects,and hence theshapesof the sub-groupsobtained, depend to a large extent on the investigator). The methodhas been extensively applied to small anthropologicalsamples,and the emergenceof sub-groups was regarded as evidence for the real existence of clear-cut, separableracial types withina panmicticpopulation. These typessoon received a genetic interpretation: they were conceived of as sets of traitscontrolled by single, pleiotropic genes. Thus a "pure Nordic" became a homozygote"AA" and a "Nordic-Lapponoid hybrid" became a heterozygote "AL," etc. This assumptionallowed the typology of families to be interpretedin termsof simple Mendelian rules; on the other hand it permittedthe application of the Hardy-Weinberg law to the typologicalanalysisof populations. And "astronomically accurate" accordance betweenfacts and expectations has been reportedby severalworkers using the latterprocedure.To be sure,it was later indicated (Henzel and Michalski 1955: 557-61) that in at least one instance this accordance was obtained only after certain skulls belonging to the original sample had been omitted fromtheanalysis;and thatin numerous otherinstances observedfrequencies the of pure typesfitted values predicted the by the polynomial expansion only because some individuals had been assigned to typesto which theyex definitione could not belong. Nevertheless, the whole systemseemed logical, coherent, and strikingly simple;and racial anthropologists Poland, almostwithin out exception, have fallen under the spell of thissimplicity. The factthatthe founderof the school,apart frombeing a brilliantscholar, happens to be a very forcefuland vigorous person, has undoubtedlyplayed a role too. A factorwhich helped to perpetuate this state of affairs was the long isolation of Polish science fromthe outside world, due first World War II and to the Germanoccupation,and then,after the war, to other circumstances which for 10 yearsgreatlyimpeded the inflow

of freshideas fromthe West. This period of isolation (from1939 roughlyto 1956) exactlycoincides with the emergence and rapid growthof "the new in physicalanthropology" Americaand England. is This is whya Polish anthropologist to still able to remain faithful the idea of "individual taxonomy"-just as if almostnothinghad changedin physical during the past 20 years. anthropology I shall now turnto some specificimarticle.I can plicationsof Wiercifiski's only brieflytouch upon some major points here. A full discussionof all issues which I consider questionable would require much more space than is available for a commentator. 1. The populationist theoryof race has not evolved "as anthropologyassimilated the concepts of classic Mendelism," but only as it assimilatedthe concepts of population genetics,especially the concept of microevolution; based on nor is this theorynecessarily "the discoverythat racial featuresare determinedby a seriesof independent combininggenes,"but rather randomly thatracial fromtherecognition it stems are operdifferences producedby forces ating on the gene pools of populations of ratherthanon genotypes individuals, are and hence such differences of an ratherthan an intrainter-populational populational nature.I thinkthatWierhas thoroughly confusedthis iscifiski I sue. Incidentally, considerit remarkable that in an article discussingthe theoreticalfoundationsof the modern concept of race such crucial notions as "evolution,"and "population genetics," "natural selection"do not appear even once. 2. The fact that populationism a for might, a racist,constitute handier proves conceptthanindividualtypology validity nothing as far as the scientific of theseconceptsis concerned. 3. "A certain scepticismabout any a of possibility constructing real intrahuman taxonomy" inevitable. is specific From the very fact that races are subtaxonomicunits it followsthat specific theycan interbreed-and always do so whenever isolationbetweenthemis not absolute. It is verynaive to expect that like a sharply morphodefined anything logical boundarycan be drawnbetween groups which constantly exchange genes.Such boundarieshave to be more or less arbitrary. Wierciiiskiis wrong when he implies that individual typology is able to overcome this difficulty. were As a matterof fact,if typologists critical enough of their own findings they would not only share the "taxonomic scepticism"of modern anthropologists,but theywould have to give 21

up any hope of settingup a "real human taxonomy"at all, since the lines whichcan be drawn betweenrace-types are obviouslyconventional to a much greater extent than those delimiting race-populations. 4. Afterhaving read Wierciiiski's argument that by means of individual analysisit is possible to trace the same racial types in craniological samples back to the Neolithic,one feelsinclined to ask the author: Well, what of it? Is this supposed to corroborate the belief that such typesare complexes of geneticallylinked traits?The fact that certain more-or-less conspicuous combinations of traitsrecur in several successive epochs by no means contradicts the theoryof independent inheritanceof those traits.Man was certainly polyas morphic 100 generationsago as he is now. In the Neolithic-just as todaysome individuals were dolichocephalic and some brachycephalic;some were narrow-facedand some broad-faced; some had high and some low orbits.' Why, then,Wiercifiski findsit difficult to assume that 3,000 yearsago random assortment was combining all these traitsinto constellations identical with thosewhich it still producesnow is beyond my comprehension. means of By "individual racial diagnosis" one can veryeasilyconstruct and prove theories about the great antiquityof types: all depends on how one setsup the definitionsof such types. One can easilyselect a set of morphologicaltraitspresentin both modern Poles and-say-Neanderthal man, subdivideeach traitinto two or threecategories, combine theminto a proper number of types-and subsequentlydiscoverthatsome people seen today in the streets Warsaw display of great similarity type to some of the in cavemen of 100,000yearsago. This information mightshockthe averageman in the streetbut a professional anthropologist should, I think, realize that such proceduresare not veryrevealing. 5. I doubt whetheranything mysas terious as "difficulties selecting the of best diagnostic featuresand establishing their taxonomic value, i.e. their proper normalization" (p. 00) has to be looked for to explain the fact that Czekanowski's method of differential diagnosishas so fargiven "bestresults" when applied to paleoanthropological and "less satisfactory" materials, results when used to detect typeswithin contemporary populations.I suggest sima .pler explanation: paleoanthropologists usuallydeal withtaxonomicdifferences of a specific even genericorder,i.e., or withgroupsusuallyseparatedfrom each otherby somemorphological hiatus.No

wonderthat Czekanowski's methodcan sort out subgroupsin such a polytypic assemblage of skulls (e.g. SteslickaMydlarska1947) because subgroupsare really present there. And no wonder that serious trouble begins when one attemptsto discoversubgroupswithin a singlepanmicticpopulation in which there occur only individual variability and no inter-group differences. 6. The twice-repeated suggestion that traits used for typologicalclassificationsare geneticallylinked is, to utilize Wiercifiski's own expression, "pure a priori speculation requiring geneticproof."I do not know any facts which mightnecessitatethishypothesis of linkage; nor do I know of any concrete studywhich would confirm at or least suggestit. To be sure, the author referstwice to one of his own papers (Wierciiiski 1958); he does not say,however, that in that study he actually failed to furnishany evidence for the existenceof linkage because he did not use a valid test.His idea was to findout how much concordance in typology thereis betweenparentsand offspring. When, for instance,a "purelyNordic" person was born to an equally "purely Nordic" couple,or whena personwhom the investigator assigned to the "Litoral" type("HE") had parentswhom he assigned to the "Dinaric" and "NorthWestern" types ("HA" x "EA"), such cases were regardedas concordant;but a "Litoral" ("HE") individual whose parents were classified as "Dinaric" and "Sub-Nordic" ("HA" x "LA") would constitute a discordance. Proceeding in this way, Wiercifiski found that ca. 70 per cent of all investigated cases are concordant, fromwhichhe inferredthat the 5 traitson which his typological classification was based (cephalic, facial, and nasal index, and eye and hair color) are probably controlledbygenessituatedin a singlepair of chromosomes. Any comment as to the validity of thatanalysiswould be superfluous. One may only add that this"linkage study" is not extraordinary; typologicalliterature is replete with examples of disregardforthe elementary principlesof genetics. 7. The conceptof "several,or at least two,groups of linked series of genes," which the author uses, seems obscure. What does it exactlymean? What is a "series,"and what a "group" of genes? 8. The so-called Comparative Morphological School of anthropological typology-founded Ireneusz Michalby ski and restricted a small but very to outspokengroup of his disciplesin the Anthropology Departmentof the University L6di-has earnedWiercifiski's of highest praise, since it has allegedly 'Although the frequenciesof particular traitsmight,of course,have been different. managed to produce conclusive evi-

dence for"the actual phenotypicexistence of morphological types." I consider this opinion exaggerated,to say the least. It is truethat the Morphological School originatedin opposition to the "formalized mathematization of taxonomic analysis."The violent criticism which it has launched against the extravagancesof the mathematicallyorientedtypology was valuable and inin formative that it greatlyhelped to expose the spuriousnessof the "astronomical precision" of typologicalanalyses claimed by Czekanowski and his followers.The "morphologists," however,failedto realize thatthereal source of trouble into which Czekanowski's mathematized typology run was the has fundamentaland erroneousthesisthat a breeding population can be objectivelydivided into pure and mixed racial types. Instead of attacking this thesis, the "morphologists" have directedtheirattackalong a wrongtrack, i.e., theyquestioned the idea that types are detectable by means of statistical analyses. Their reasoning ran as follows: thereis no doubt that typesexist as real, separable entities;but statistical methods fail to confirm this belief; hence, statisticalmethods are useless ... foranthropology What kinds of research tools remain,then,for a typologist? There is only one fully reliable "taxonomtool,and thisis theclassifier's ical intuition,"his "skilled and experiencedeye." The bulkiest study so far based on this approach is a detailed typological classification 36,000 adult men carof ried out by Michalski (1949). Wiercifiskiregardsthisstudyas a major achievement "in attainingproper understanding of the taxonomicdifferentiation of a population." The odd thingis, however, that from the three sentences whichMichalskidevotesto the description of his "morphological method" (1949: 10), and which Wiercifiskirepeats almost word by word in his article, it is altogetherimpossible to understand how this method works,i.e., how the investigator arrivesat the concrete definitions types.For instance, of how does he ascertain that the maximum value of the cephalic index in a "pure Nordic" is exactly82 and notsay-79 or 85? All we learn about this "processof delimitingtypes"is that it is "laborious" and based exclusively on "simple morphologicalobservation."I findit, however,absolutelyimpossible to believe that in such an enormous body of material (36,000 individualsl), characterized continuoustraitsmost by of which exhibit approximatelynormal (or, at any rate, monomodal) frequency distributions, one can, without resorting anystatistical to tests, only not discover the existence of "centers of
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

22

land, correspondingin their morphological habitus to the definition the of Mediterranean element, must be assigned to it regardlessof their ethnic origin." In my opinion this sort of attempt at racial analysis is hopelessly unscientific doomed fromthe start. and Bielicki,in his argumentin favorof the use of "polygenic"traits, statesthat the plasticity the characters quesof in tion mustbe knownto be low. I should like to ask how we are ever to know whetherthis is true of any given set of characters.I should also ask whether the term"polygenic,"whichhas a definite technical meaning, is not being misusedby Bielicki instead of the term correctly used by Birdsell, which was "multifactorial." It may be true that (p. 4) the "Mongoloid origin of the American Indians . . . could hardly have been established had their racial analysis been based solely on the present distributionof blood group genes," but I wonderif it has been established any by othermeans that theAmericanIndians are of purelyMongoloid origin.By any it criteria, seems to me, theyare much By WILLIAM C. BOYD* less typically Mongoloid than the ChiOn the whole I findmyself agree- nese, Japanese, or certain tribes of in Siberia. Could it be that the multiment with the opinions expressed in these papers, but disagree with some factorial traits which are so dear to Bielickihave also been affected drift, by points. I am inclined to agree withWierciib- selection,or mixture? I am not convincedthat it is permnisski that the term"ethnic group" is posible to extend Birdsell's demonstratentiallydangerous. Certainly I have never been convinced that we should tion that random genetic driftwould multifactorial substituteit for "race." On the other affect traitsmore slowly hand, I do not agree with him in be- than it does unifactorialcharactersto the effect natural selection. Unlike of lieving that genetic linkage will have effect, selectionopermuch effecton the independent dis- the Sewall-Wright tribution thevariousgenesin a popu- ates, not on genes,but on phenotypes. of If any multifactorial lation. phenotypehas a I do not agree at all withthe assump- selective disadvantage in a given entionsof theCzekanowski School,quoted vironment,it will be eliminated just x, y, z." with apparent approval. as surely,and just as rapidly,as a uniby Wiercifiski I find it amazing that Wiercibskiis In facttheyseemverydubious to me. factorialcharacterconferring same the able to regard all this as evidence for I do not agree thatany description of degree of disadvantage. "the actual, phenotypic existence of human populationswe use must"make Bielicki states(p. 8) that"thereis not morphologicaltypes." scrap of directevidencefor possible the exact comparisonof osteo- the faintest 9. Perhaps the mosttellingobjectiQn logical and living material." It is of the action of selection upon such huwhichcan be raised againstthe individ- coursenice when it does, forone of the man traitsas, e.g., facial lengthor hair ualist conceptof race is thatit is incom- goals of thephysicalanthropologist will form."This maybe true,but if Bielicki patible with modern Darwinism, par- alwaysbe the workingout of the early is a sporting man I should like to make ticularly withwhatis now knownabout historyof the human races. But I do a small wager with him that evidence the mechanismof race formation. This not thinkwe ought to reject a method fora directaction of selectionon hair point has been thoroughly discussedin of descriptionwhich is obviouslysupe- form will sooner or later be discovered. severalexcellentbooks and papers (e.g. rior taxonomically any othermerely to Both of these papers, excellent as Dobzhansky 1951, 1953, 1955; Garn because it could not be applied to osteo- theyare in many ways,seem to me to 1957) and thereis no need to elaborate logical material. On the other hand, I show that the authorsretain tracesof a on it here. One may only add that in- do not assert that such a superior belief that I have previouslyanalyzed dividual typologyhas never seriously method will necessarily exist. Bones and characterizedas a "pious wish." concerned itself with the problem of may not have any greater taxonomic This is the belief that characteristics of "how do races arise?"-consideringit a value than otherfeatures, theymay the bones will be more resistant to but nuisance ratherthan a question which not have any less either. change than will characteristics the of mustbe answeredbeforeone can really I mostemphatically not agree that softparts of the body and biochemical do understandwhat races are. (p. 18) "individuals fromItaly and Po- and physiologicalcharacteristics. This Vol. 3 -No. 1 *February1962 23

crystallization" establish but, moreover, theirexact boundaries. This puzzle is solved by a remark whichWiercihiski drops in passing,that the procedure is facilitated by preexistingknowledge.Actually it is not merelyfacilitated but made possible by such knowledge.The point is that the "morphologist" is deeply convinced that typesexist,and knows theirexact definitionsbefore he begins his analysis; he needs no proof, statisticalor any other; he knows.Hence the actual and only goal of his analysisis not to detecttypeswithinthe studied population, but to classify individuals,i.e., to put each individual in the proper cell of a fixedclassification scheme.For instance,to the "Nordic" grouphe assigns everyperson who fulfills the following requirements:stature at least 165 cm, facial index not less than 84, cephalic index not more than 82, etc. All these boundaries are, of course,purely arbitrary and artificial, thisis precisely but what the "morphologist" not willing is to admit. In order to conceal the fact that it is he who designs types,he resortsto a simpleverbal trick. After having sortedout all individualsfitting the definitionof a "Nordic" he calculates thearithmetic meansof theirdiagnostic traitsand thengoes on to announce: as can be seen, people belonging to this type defined themselvesas tall, longfaced dolichocephals,etc. (cf.Michalski 1949: 25, 37). Needless to say, in this mannerthe investigator discovers nothing but whathe himself assumedin has advance. The whole proceduremay be summedup as being of a grammatical ratherthanof taxonomicalnature,since all it amounts to is a simple replacement of the sentence: "Individuals displayingtraitsx, y, z, have been defined by me as the typeN"-by another sentence: "Individuals forming typeN the defined themselvesas possessingtraits

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY

OF RACE

10. The principal reason for which Wiercihiski's defence of individual typology fails to convinceme lies in the factthat in the courseof myuniversity schoolingI have been fullyexposed to all the extravagancesof this doctrine, and my knowledge of its "achievements" is first-hand. have read many I a typological paper whichin myopinion is simplyincongruouswith the genetical or statistical point of view or both. I had to ponder manytimesthe biological significanceof concepts like "a Nordic-Lapponoid hybrid with slight traces of Cromagnonoid admixtures;" and I witnessed heated debates on such topics as: "Should a blond, narrownosed brachycephalbe regarded as a light-haired variant of the NordicArmenoid type or as a Nordoid-like fraction of the Nordic-Lapponoid type?" This is exactly the kind of research to which Wiercifiski's proposals inevitablylead. I refuseto accept the of validity "ethnogenetic theories" built on such methodologicalfoundations. [Wroclaw,21.7.61]

it belief has no scientific justification; is based partly on the hope that the only characters can identify skelewe in tal materialwill be more stable,in the evolutionary sense, than those we cannot so identify, and partly,I believe, on an almost mysticalbelief that because bones are hard their characteristics are more resistantto evolutionary change. [Boston,26.7.61] By V. BUNAK Polish anthropological schools.In the years1927-1935Czekanowski published some formulasforthe racial analysisof populations. Anthropologists' opinions of these formulasvaried fromfull rejection to full acceptance. In Poland, despite many objections on thepart of the Cracow School (Stolychwo), Czekanowski'smethod was applied in most raciological works. At presentthereare two or threevarieties of the method(the schoolsof Michalski and Wanke). Wiercifski's article sets forthnew argumentsin favourof the method. Bielicki's articletestifies a new dito rection in anthropologicalresearchin Poland. Bielicki concludes that the methodof "individual taxonomicdiagnosis" (which formsthe kernel of Czekanowski's method) is untenable; its premises not reconcilablewithmodare ern genetics.The author of this comment subscribes, for the most part, to the criticalremarksof Bielicki and to objections in previous criticalworks. The meaning of summarydeviation of characteristics. Bielicki states that there is no analogy between the elein mentswhichcan be segregated a popuulation and geneticunits.However,in the positivepart of his article,Bielicki finds it useful to calculate the "comof ponent frequencies" a group and for this purpose recommends the formulas worked out by Wanke, based on the mean deviations of each characteristic in a group from the corresponding values in some standardgroup. I have no intentionof analyzingthe mathematicalside of Wanke's formula and of comparingit withthe analogous coefficients "racial likeness" (Pearof son) or of "generalizeddistance" (Mahalanobis and Rao). It is essentialthat two mean deviationsof equal size sometimes have differentmorphological

It was shownlong ago, thatthemean value of the difference a given set of in characteristics between a Negro group and a European groupand betweentwo groupsof the same race,Negro or European, can be the same. Even if we compare relativelyclose groups, the mean difference not alwaysa reliable measis ure of theirsimilarity. 24

meanings.

Let us take two groups having the same mean deviation in fivecharacteristics (fromsome standardvariant). In have the first group all characteristics small deviationsand at the same time charfromcorresponding do not differ territory. in acteristics the surrounding In the second group only two characteristicsshow deviation and in the neighbouringzones both deviate still There is no morein the same direction. doubt that these two groups belong to anthropologicalvarieties. different If we compare a number of groups by means of the indices of summarised of difference (coefficient Pearson, Mahalanobis and others), we find as a rule, that a group "A" is most similar to groups "B" and "C," but that "B" Because of and "C" differ significantly. of so-called"cross-similarity" characteristics ("netztartigeVerwandschaft"of is German zoologists), one coefficient of for not sufficient the classification groups. anthropological These examples show, that for comparisons between complexes of racial peculiaritiesit is necessaryto make a detailed analysis of the characteristics under investigation,taking into acand distribution, counttheir variability, correlation. The exact value of the mean deviation can be used only in a fewspecial cases. An approximate evaluation of the betweengroups(in differences summary for effect quite sufficient theircomparison) can be obtained by means of a simplegraph (the graph of Molison). If we mark on paper the points correspondingto the relativedeviation of in each characteristic the groups X, Y, P, and join these points by the lines X, Y, P, the position of the points and of the lines immediatelyshows with sufficient precisionthe relativesimilarityof each traitand of the set of traits taken as a whole. It is generallyassumed that the deof gree of similarity the groups varies in proportion to the degree of their kinship. Bielicki goes furtherin sugis gestingthat the relative similarity a directmeasureof kinship.The amount in whichsome componentX is present in the mixed population P is given by the coefficient likeness between X of and P. Bielicki points out thathis conclusion holds good only if some simpliare assumptions made,but the list fying of limitingconditionsgiven by Bielicki is not complete. To obtain the supit posed proportions would be necessary in thatall characteristics a mixed population belong to the typeof intermediate inheritance,that the mixed group of include the offspring all kinds of matings(panmixicconditions)etc.Most groups which are studied by anthrotheseconditions. pologistsdo not satisfy

It is well knownthatmanycharacteristicsin a group can change because of the oscillating frequency of several kinds of matingsand a changingquantitativerelation between genes. If the specificintragroup modificationsproceed in one direction,they are designated "drift." Bielicki is quite rightin stating the inadequacy of Wanke's formulaforthe analysisof such non-stablegroups,but on the other hand he defends the hypothesisthat"traitscontrolledby many genes are relativelyresistantboth to and to natrandomgeneticfluctuations ural selection." Our knowledge of the of role of selection in transformation remains anthropologicalcharacteristics intragroup insufficient, as to specific but the above hypothesisis modifications refuted by theoretical considerations (Bunak 1936) and data concerningthe of fluctuation the mean values of the withinthe groups,where characteristics the influence of hybridizationis excluded (Bunak 1932, 1960). Thus there is no reason to considerthemean deviation of groups as a reliable measureof their similarityor genetical relationship. Race and territory. Anthropologists, applying several formulasof mean deviation, are inclined to consider the values obtained as the only tool in charracial analysis. The coefficients only or acterize (correctly incorrectly) one taxonomicalcriterion-morphological similarity-anddo not take into account anotherimportantcriterion-the geographical distributionof a given anthropologicalvariety.A complex of traitsacquires the meaning of a racial characteristic only if it is closelylinked If to a definite territory. thiscondition is not realized and the complex studied is extraterritorial, becomes a charit acteristicof a physiological, ecological or professional group,but not of a taxonomic category. Wiercifiski mentioned the "cartographical"methodof Denikerand Biassutti,but he did not discuss the sharp betweenthismethodand contradiction that of individual diagnosis.Therefore I shall set forth some generalprinciples of the geographicalmethod,as theyare in formulated Soviet anthropology. 1. Variations of a characteristic are sometimesquite evenlyrepresentedin form all partsof a regionand sometimes separategroupslinked to certainzones. In consideringthe difference between the two extremevariants(with its stathe tisticalreliability), localization and we of the concentration variants, determine whether- or more typicalvarone under iants are presentin the territory investigation. The presenceof two variants becomes verycertainwhen there is a series of intermediateformsbeCURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

tweenthemor when the variants the on adjacent territories deviate in the same directionas one of the extremetypes. 2. If the typical variants of different traits localized in the same area, are thereis one single typein the territory studied characterized the combinaby tion of typicalvariants.When the central zones for different traits do not coincide, we have to use two or more partially different complexes.The interserial correlation different of characteristics,the localizationof complexes,the amplitudeof theirvariations, and other factsshow clearly,in most cases,which of manycombinations the mostcharis acteristic and which are accidental and not indicativefor the territory. 3. The next step in the analysisconsists in comparing the type under investigationwith those of the adjacent and of the nearest territorial territory races.If mostcharzones of well-known acteristics the group studied do not of surpass the limits of variationsin one of these races, we can designate our group as a sub-raceor zonal, local variant of the given race. An intermediate positionof our group,both morphological and geographical,allows the supposition of the mixed origin of the group-a conclusion,which is probable ifit is corroborated an analysisof the by variabilityof the complex and by the ethno-historical data. It is worthwhileto mention, that hybridization a group does not exin clude the possibility its inclusion in of the seriesof variantsof one or another race. 4. The intergroup correlation of characteristics specificfor each teris ritory. Absence of correlationindicates thatthegrouphas becomehomogenous; in this case several combinations of characteristics equally probable.But are in most cases homogenization is not achieved even in stable groups.A study of numerousRussian groupshas shown thatin mostcharacteristics intensity the of connexion varies from0.2 to 0.5 or 0.3-0.7, if there is a morphogenetical interdependenceof characteristics, as thereis betweenhead and facebreadth. The value of the correlationcoefficient and its sign (plus or minus) reto flects a certaindegree the racial historyof the group: the initial intensity of connexion of characteristics specific fora race or sub-race and thesubsequent modification the typedue to changes of in degree of isolation, the changing of frequency certainkinds of matings, the admixtureof a group of another sub-race or other race, etc. The connexion of traitscharacterizing race the or sub-racefound on a territory desis ignated in Soviet anthropology the by term"historical"correlation. In contradistinctionto the interVol. 3 -No. I -February1962

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF RACE

group connexion the intragroupcorrelation of many characteristics varies withinnarrowlimitsaround zero. in The absenceof correlation a stable group indicates the great diversity of combinations characteristics sepaof in rate individuals. The number of possible different combinations depends on thenumberof characteristics studied and theirsubdivision.For 5 characteristics, each with 2 variants, 2' or 64 individual combinations are different possible. of Tables of individual combinations in many characteristics large groups have been published by many anthropologists (for example, Popov 1959). These tables alwaysshow a great numindividual combinaber of different tions, correspondingon the whole to the expected frequenciesof each complex. The analysis of correlation thus shows that the connexion of traits found in a territory provides the most of reliable characterization a race. To diagnose the racial typeof an individual it is necessaryto include numerous differentcombinations in a small numberof racial variants.There is no reliable basis forsuch a classification of diversecomplexes. The hypothesis, according to which the pleiotropyof some genes or their localization in one part of the chromosome is a factorwhich maintains the stabilityof a racial type,is refutedby of of the diversity combinations characfound in one group. The numteristics ber of different combinationsexceeds the possiblediversity a fewinvariable of complexes. The taskof raciologicalinvestigation is theanalysisof therelationships difof ferentgroups,which is given by their taxonomic definition (race, sub-race, etc.). The method which Wiercifiski and Bielicki, in part, defend replaces this goal by another. Both authors assume that each group is formedby the mixture of certain elements and that the difference betweengroupsis due to unequal participation theseelementsin of theircomposition. In reality mixtureis not the only factor in racial differentiation; determination of the relative frequencyof the same invariable complexes (even if it werecorrect) does not replace the usual taxonomic diagnostics. The concept of race. Both authorsassume that thereis a definite numberof races and that theircomplexesof characteristicshave remained unchanged since theperiod of race formation. This is incompatible with the theories of modern biology.

Taking into account zoological and a anthropological investigations, race withsome appears as a circleof varieties characteristics common to all varieties and others characteristicof separate groups. Because of territorialexpansion, the changingdegree of isolation, partial mixtureof varieties,and other factors,the number of sub-racesand sets of qualities characteristic each of groupand of therace as a whole change. Each race originatedin a definite territory.There are no so-called "sympatric"races.The gradual enlargement of the primaryterritory, later also and themigration manygroupsin certain of directions enlarged or restrictedthe originalarea, but could not lead to the universaldispersionof several typesor the appearance of a type in a veryremote zone of a continent, the Armeof noid typein Poland and theLapponoid in Switzerland, instance. for It is evident that the so-called "eleracial types"are in realityconmentary ventional extraterritorial variants the whichdo not characterize racial historyof the population studied. [Moscow, 25.8.61] By LIDIO CIPRIANI Bielicki's article cannot be fullyappraised until we have more knowledge of the biological laws governing apthe pearance of somatictraits man. This in does not mean thatwe should refuseto consider elaborations of anthropological data until such facts available; I are wish only to make the point that all of directed establishing types research at interpopulationrelationships, matno ter how conducted inevitablyresult in deductions that are provisional until new light is available fromgeneral biology.Bielicki fullyrealizes this. Bielickistatesthatone of "the crucial problemsin racial anthropology race is formation,"and views "hybridism"as one of the most importantcauses of change in metricand descriptive traits. In myopinion,manyfactors otherthan hybridismare involved in the establishmentof a new human type.For instance, in comparing the Negritos of Andaman with other Asiatic populawe are facedwiththeproblemof change human typesin differamong different ent parts of the world convergingtoward a considerablereduction of stature. Hybridism, thiscase, appears to in be out of the question. The cause must have been the same in every part of the world where Pygmiesare found. The original impulse toward reduction of staturewas probablyof environmental origin. 25
tions and even with African Pygmies,

Hybridism, however, is constantly alert to build new and permanentbody shapes when these are required. New human typesarise fromdifferent components to cope with situations that were never met before.Identical phenomena are constantly occurring among animals and plants. Human hybridism appears to be deeply affected similar by processes. Probablyonly in thisway can new types result fromracial mixture, while naturalselectionworksonly from the outside. Such characters stature, as head shape and dimension,and skin, hair, or eye color must be supposed to change following an identicalprocess.We do not know, I insist,the laws involved; and thisis to be remembered when trying to interpretthe facts. Bielicki seems inclined to explain increasedstatureand brachycephalythrough natural selection,but I am rather reluctantto accept this.Mendelian dominance,I think,is more at workon this phenomenon.To studythisthoroughly, however, research on a seriesof generations required. is As forWiercisiski's article,I can add a few supplementaryremarks to my comments Bielicki's.For severalreaon sons, I consider aleatory most of the analysisconcerning ethnogenesis; it yet is advisable to undertakesuch research even if our vision is temporarily limited. WierciAiski's analysisis, then,welcome. However, the origin of human races is only an episode,and not an importantone, of thebroaderhorizonthat includes the origin of species-a problem about which we still are far from having clear knowledge. We are not likely to increase this knowledge through even the cleverest statistical elaborationsof metric and descriptive characters. The only source of such assistanceis biology,and we particularly need more intensive research not so muchon thehuman phenotype genoor typeas on how species originatein nature. Man certainlyfollows the same laws as thosethatare valid forall other species. I maintain that our primary aim must be to learn something about such problemsand, together with this, the reasons for modification human of typesthroughout ages. For this,and the as we are doing in Italy,originalphysiological and psychobiological researchis needed. Finally,we mustkeep in mind the fact that "true" human biologyhas not yetperhaps been born. [Firenze,3.7.61] By CARLETON S. COON* On the articlebyAndrzejWiercifiski: 1. The lack of agreementabout the general conceptof race (p. 2) is, in my opinion, largelydue to the failure of physical anthropologists pay proper to
26

attention zoology.Zoologists to have de- as well as individualvariability. (2) It mightbe better not to apply fined subspecies and local races quite adequately for other animals; Homo the Polish system statisticalanalysis of sapiens need be no exception. to all populations in the world until shall have been more firmly 2. Disagreements about the defini- thissystem tion of individual races stem,I believe, equated with population geneticsand from the facts that the characteristics allowancesmade forenvironmental inparticularly growth, in cited (p. 9) are polygenic in origin; fluences, and for that some of themhave variable selec- natural selection. tive values in different physicaland so(3) The proposal to make a global cial environments;and that hybrids analysison the basis of a single system have reduced viability under certain is just as good, or bad, as the system; circumstances. and once a work of such magnitude 3. Germanyis not the only country shall have been undertaken, there is wherepoliticshas interfered withracial always danger of critical myopia and studies. Wiercifiski mighthave added, complacency. us obtain a moregenLet had he been exposed to it, that in the eral agreementon method before emUnited States the Cold Civil War now barkingon such a massiveenterprise. going on over integration produced has On the article by Tadeusz Bielicki: some disapproval of our discipline,in There is little that I can say about are which some anthropologists implithis articleexcept that it is well organcated. and thoroughly to up 4. I approve of WierciAski'sdisap- ized,well written, proval of Montagu's term "ethnic date in terms of currentthinkingon group" as a substitutefor "race," but race. In my opinion, the author's emof on the grounds that this substitution phasison thevalidity polygenictraits ignores the evidence of animal taxon- in racial analysis is both sound and omy, rather than because it is just as original. However,I do not agree that 10,000 dangerousas the conceptof race in the sense.It is not our business years is too brief a time for human phenotypic populations to have been molded by to worry about what politicianswill do natural selection,particularly selection withour data. 5. I agree that blood groups cannot in migration, and by the re-emergence be used as a singlebasis forracial classi- of old, locally adapted traits, singlyor fication, althoughtheyare becomingin- in combination.As for the changes in creasinglyuseful as more is learned the cephalic index in Central Europe and elsewhere, should bear in mind we about them. 6. Wiercifiski'ssection "The Indi- the changesin head form whichare due vidualist Concept of Race" is the first to cradlingand to the relationshipbeclear and concise explanation of the tween head formand growthin genCzekanowskimethod of racial analysis eral. thatI have seen in a language thatI can read. This also applies to the criticisms On both articles: by Polish and Russian anthropologists. It is a very healthy prognostication Except forhis finalparagraph, however, forthe vitalityand progress our disof thereis no indicationof the role of nat- cipline that CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY is ural selection in the genetic composi- publishingthese two articles,and that tion of populations. the authorshave submittedtheirwork 7. WierciAskistates (p. 17) that in to the criticism others, of includingmymany populations the racial diagnosis self.I am verygrateful everyone to conis oversimplified and thus invalidated cernedforhaving been allowed to read because therehave been manyimmigra- these stimulatingpapers and to comtions whose former existence should menton them. somehow be revealed. I do not think [Devon, Pennsylvania, 2.7.61] that any method of analysis could be devised which would permit anthropologiststo detect these immigrations, By TH. DOBZHANSKY* It is good to have the statements because immigrants eventuallybecome by absorbed. Wiercifiski and Bielicki of the methods of descriptionof the "racial" structure 8. Wiercifsski states (p. 18) that "a population is described by the hypo- of mankind in termsof the so-called thetical frequencies of its racial ele- "racial elements"evolved by the Polish ments" and gives a formula for com- schools of anthropology.The validity puting them. Unless I am greatly of any methodin sciencedepends upon mistaken,nature does not work that thepurpose thatit is supposed to serve. way. Biologically considered,man is a sex9. As for Wiercifiski'sconclusions ually reproducingoutbreedingspecies. Dealing withsuch species,we wish,first, (pp. 19,20): (1) I agree that statistical means are to ascertainthenatureof thedifferences not enough; but theyshould be studied observed between individuals and beCURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

tween populations; and secondly,since we musttalk and writeabout thesedifferences, like to establisha convenwe ient classificationand nomenclature. For the first these purposes,the use of of monogenic and other genetically simple traitsoffers evident advantages. Now, studiescarriedout on such traits in man and in otheroutbreeding species have demonstratedclearly that, apart fromindividuals,the only meaningful entities with which one can deal are Mendelian populations. No two indihave the viduals,exceptidenticaltwins, same genotypes,and "types" or "elements"are constructs devoid of biological reality. Assigning "individualsfrom Italy and Poland, correspondingin theirmorphologicalhabitus to the definition of the Mediterraneanelement" to that "element," regardlessof their ethnicorigin and the breedingpopulation to which they belong, disregards two basic facts.First,similarity moror phological habitus is not necessarily since numerproof of genetic identity, ous geneticdifferences may not be perin ceptiblyreflected externalmorpholwithpolygenic ogy.And secondly, traits, similarresultsare often phenotypically attained through operationof different genetic mechanisms. Therefore, your "Mediterranean"Italians and Poles may be "Mediterranean" for different genetic reasons. As far as classification concerned, is the use of "types"or "elements"is open to equally serious objections. If the classificationis to be natural in the evolutionarysense, it should, ideally, take cognizance of all genetic differences, polygenic and monogenic. It is certainlynot true that polygenictraits are resistant the action of natural seto lection. Quite the contrary, whole the evidence fromgenetic, studies on both domesticated and wild organisms shows thatadaptively important traits and differences between populations and subspecies are overwhelmingly polygenic. And finally, the taxonomic value of a trait is not fairlymeasurable in terms of its adaptivenessor neutrality. This is the more so since some "neutral" traitsmay actually be parts of the genetic architecture the gene pool of of a population,whichmaybe biologically rather than as a adaptive as a system, sum of independent neutral and unneutral elements. Types and typologicalthinkingmay have their uses, but in the historyof biological and anthropologicalthought theyhave done more harm than good. This is obviouslytoo complex a matter to be covered in a brief comment. Among recent authors,G. G. Simpson has discussedit admirablyin his book on principlesof taxonomy(1961). [Portal,Arizona,23.7.61] Vol. 3 -No. 1 *February1962

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY

OF RACE

By STANLEY M. GARN* WierciUiski's approach to race consists of "typing" individuals within a sampling, and then making deductions as to the origins of the sample fromthe proportions the various "types."His of methodis therefore and his typological, interest historical. Both are reminiscent ofracial investigations theU. S. prior in to 1941. The trouble with types,however,is that they are infinitein number, dependingupon the typologist's virtuosity and the computationalfacilities has he at hand. For two sets of dichotomous attributes, thereare fourpossibletypes, and so on in endless number.In practice, however,the typologist's "types" generallyreflect races he recognizes the and the guesseshe makes at the startof his study.Once he has his types,he is stuckwith them,and there is little residual freedom makingthe historical in reconstruction. a population is diIf vided into Negritid, Mongolid, and Europid types, will thenbe explained it in termsof such origins,even if the population came fromMars! We have long been disenchanted with "types" in this country,for they involve full-circle reasoning.Types are in reality chance combinations, Hunt as neatly demonstrated. There is no reason to believe that a "Mediterranean," "Dinaric," or "East Baltic" subject in Wales will possessthe same residualheredityas the similarly typedindividual in Warsaw.And thisgoes forserological typologies as well as morphological typologies (or haptoglobin typologies or transferrin typologies). Inferences drawnfromtypesare purelygratuitous, and straincredulity. Faced with "Australoids"marchingover the South Pole to Patagonia, "Semites" migratingto Papua, "Koreans" to the Kalahari, and hypothetical streams pouring out of Asia, mostof us gave up the typological approach in sheerexhaustion. Moreover,mostof us are committed to natural selectionto whichthe stabletype approach stands in actual opposition.We see that, various populations exposed to malarial selection develop increased frequencies, not only of the abnormalhemoglobins, of glutathibut one instabilityas well. We see how clinesjump over national,"racial," and geographicalboundaries.An example is blood group B. Migration theorycan hardlyexplain the increasein thisgene eastward and southward from Northwest Europe. Nor could an Australoid "element" (verylow in M) and a Mongoloid "element"(moderatein M), produce-without the help of natural selection-the Amerindians who are

extraordinarily highin M. Thus, we are sceptical of a purely typological approach, especially where human polymorphisms distributethemselves along broad lines, fittingthe mean annual temperaturein some cases, the incidence of a particulardisease in others, or suggesting(as in the scatteredphenomenon of taste-insensitivity) purely local selective factors. I do not mean to saythatin a particular country,such as Poland, the approach thatWierciiiski is suggests without value. "Typing" and thencounting types may produce results similar to those utilizingtrait or population frequencies. The inferences-assuming migrationtheory-canthenbe identicalin eithercase. But thisis a round-robin approach involvingan extraand needless interpretative step. For most physicalanthropologists in America,England,Australia,and Scandinavia, and for studentsof adaptive in polymorphisms most countries,the exact definition a race is reallyirreleof vant.I can thinkof no setof wordsthat equally describesthe Bushmen on the one hand, the Miao on the other,the northernAustralians, the Lapps, the Navaho, theAmericanColored,and the Norfolk Islanders. Nor is such a description necessary.We start with a population (and so does Wiercifiski) and proceed to examine it fromdifferent views. Some of what we findagrees with historyand folklore,and that is fine.Often we discoverthat folk belief is erroneous,as in the example of the AmericanColored and theirpresumed Amerindianorigin.We findtrendsthat transcendhistory, suggesting that local selectivefactors have been at work. Today, in the studyof race, we are primarilyinterestedin the evolutionpicture. To this end, typingalone a,ry now has verylittle investigative value. There are legitimateuses for the type concept,as in medico-legal work,where we must identifyindividual skeletons, or in military anthropometry wherethe "type" may have operational use. But in explaining the distributionof the Rh negativegene in Europe, Diego in the Americas, BAIB excretionin southern America,and Fava-bean or Primaquine sensitivity hemoglobinsS and or H, typing individualsas to their"racial affinities" no part. We have major has problems to solve, and labelling individuals like bugs on pins is simplynot the approach we use today. When we Americanphysicalanthropologistswerepractitioners typology, of we were largely estranged from the scientific community. Geneticists looked on us with disdain, paleontologists with sorrow, and physiologistswith 27

thereis evidence of change,natural seunabashed horror. Admittedly these and Detroit Poles could prove to be groups were not always aware of the poles apart. With another set of traits lection may be suspected, and the historical problems we had to settle, (say 0, MN, and ahaptoglobinemia), changingtraits(or measurements)canbut theyknew the dangersof creating Poles and Japanesewould prove nearly not then be used for simple historical In and manipulatingtypes. recentyears, indistinguishable. Anyindex of likeness reconstructions.But the remaining has been possible: we rapprochement depends upon the criteriafed into it. traits(or genes) or measurements may have been able to hold cross-disciplinary That manyincompletely analyzedhu- thenbe employedwithmoreconfidence sessions on biochemical anthropology man traits largely are hereditableis cer- in attempts to reconstructthe past. and geographicalmedicine.The breed- tainlytrue. The problem with most of Rather than being exclusive,these two ing population or isolate race (however them,however,is quantification. directions interest of would seem to be Even nebulous) and problems of adaptive in this technologicalday, skin color is mutually dependent. And this, I sushave drawn us together. rarely measured as percentage reflec- pect, is what Bielicki has in mind. polymorphism In these last few years,more has been tance,and hair thickness weightper as [Yellow Springs,Ohio, 13.6.61] learned about the mechanismsof dif- unit length. We have talked about in ferentiation man, than in the entire steatopygia a century, only this for but precedingcentury. year have Weiner and Singer initiated By R. DALE GIVENS* that we start precise measurement gluteal fat. So I agree withWiercifiski Wiercifiski certainly is rightwhen he of with the individual,but the human in- an appreciable time must pass before says the present situation in human reproduc- the trait data are ready to insertinto racial classification is unsatisfactory. dividual is not a vegetatively ing plant withrunners.He is a chance the formulae for the comparison of His suggestions to how to correct as this combinationof genes, and for further populations. situation, however, seem equally unwe information need to knowabout the Moreover,I am not convinced that satisfactory. genetic makeup of the population polygenictraitsare less subject to natAfterpresenting shortbut valuable a whencehe comes.By such comparison- ural selection.With moreloci involved, critique of various classifications used parents with children,one generation more extreme phenotypes obviously both in the past and at present,Wierare with the next-the picture of change possible. Polygenic traitswould afford cifiski supports the individualist apwhat we more opportunity selection.So the proach developed by Czekanowskiand develops,and that is precisely for are interestedin. Now in considering reported "stability" of morphological later refinedby Michalski. While the the analysis of human populations in features and complex metrical traits conception of racial studies developed I relation to their "ethnogenesis," am does not prove theirgenetic conserva- by thisPolish School containsmanyvalreminded of Pitcairn island. The Pit- tism.I would suggeststabilizingselec- uable suggestions well worthfurther deof are cairners thedescendants one Eng- tion as one possibility. Selection is not velopment, it also appears to be lish sailor and a group of Tahitian exclusively one-sided, or directional, founded on a number of assumptions women. Trait frequencies reasonably and it maybe thatstability measured which do not seem to be justified, (as describe the original admixture, but by similarmeans) involves differential namely: theirracial loss at the phenotypicextremes, any attemptto reconstruct 1. That genes determining racial someof fromthe proportions various thingwe should look forin any event. history characteristics not transmitted are "types"would yield improbableresults. For just thisreason,Bielicki's studies independently; Tadeusz Bielickihas advocateda very on differential in 2. That there are racial elements survivorship relation moderate middle course,relyingupon to head formdeservecarefulattention. which are homozygoticand conpolygenic metrical traits and incom- He has concernedhimselfwith a situastant in the hereditary process; pletely analyzed (but largely heredi- tion in which directional selection 3. That all individualsmay be classifor table) morphologicaltraits the com- seemsto be the likelyanswer.By workfiedas members a racial typeor of parison of human populations. In this ing within sibships he has minimized of a mixed type which falls midboth di- extraneous sources of variance. While way he hopes to circumvent way between two or more racial rected and non-directedgene change, we maypoint to thefactthathead form typesthathave intermixed; on attention therole ofrecent can be modified, centering and to the drawbacks 4. That, at some time in the past, local admixture in the building of of the breadth-to-length ratio, and to there existed "pure" racial variepeoples. the probable influenceof scalp fat,the ties. In manyrespectshis proposal recalls facts and the findings put Bielicki at While it may occasionally happen Birdsell's p (putative) genes, and the the head of the currentclass. He has that several racial characteristics will uses of generalized distance formulae seen a problem of micro-evolution in be passed on in association with one (such as D2) and measures of pattern his own country, and has musteredthe another for several generations of a analysis. Certainly it is true that the evidence. Differentialsurvivorshipis family line, thereis no evidenceto supthatgoes into a com- theacid testof naturalselection. more information port the assumptionthat theyare not parison,themorevalid thatcomparison Poland, in fact, an ideal country is for transmitted or independently that they com- the studyof natural selection in man. are homozygotic constant.Wierciflought to be. And multi-factorial and use- It has a large rural population rather ski and thoseof the same school would parisonsshould prove increasingly ful to the various branchesof anthro- unaffected by its changing political have us believe that the central conpology. status.Fertility been high,favoring figuration racial traitsis eitherconhas of But moderation, too, has its draw- studiesrelatingto differential survival. trolledby a single,pleiotropicgene or backs, and the firstof these is the Genealogical recordsin some areas are else is due to linkage. Yet the mass of measure of comparison. Over-all com- extensive.And while findingout what evidence would indicate that the opparisons, whether using means, trait has changed in Poland, and why,will posite is true; that racial traitsare infrequencies,Z-scores or sigma ratios, yieldinformation ongoingevolution heritedindependently each other.As on of obviously depend on the measures in man, proofthatothervariableshave Bielicki points out, the mathematical chosen for use. All of them share the not changed can be of considerable support developed by Wanke for the deficienciesof the old Coeffcientof value to the racial historian. view of pleiotropismor linkage has reRacial Likeness.By the adroitselection The situationmay well be stated in cently been shown by Waliszko to be WarsawPoles or ofmeasurements traits, termsof evolutionarychange. Where due to the multiple chi-squareanalysis
28
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

contained in the and is not something admits that we data itself.Wiercifiski do not know the genetic mechanisms involved in the inheritanceof racial the yet characteristics, he criticizes population approach to the studyofhuman races for followingthe conclusion that inherited, are thesetraits independently a conclusionwhichis supportedby the of majority the data. Instead, he would have us reject thisposition in favorof assumpthe opposite, little-supported tion that there is some sort of linkage a betweenracial traits, "linkage" which is evidentlydue to the method of statisticalanalysisused ratherthan to the actual biologyof inheritance. convenientinIt would be extremely deed if all people could be definitely one specificrapegged as representing but cial typeor a mixturethereof, such an assumptionis unrealisticand idealistic. Nature simplydoes not come in of such neat packages.It is reminiscent made by Sheldon to classify the efforts each and everyindividual into a clearly type.It mightbe definedconstitutional if asked, therefore, by the use of the techniquesdeveloped by Michalskianyone outside thePolish School could also classimake such accurateand clear-cut Or fications? would such a person be forced to leave many individuals outscheme?In other side the classificatory words, is this individualist approach thatis a something measuring truetype, "out therein nature" and can be found in a high proportionof actual individuals of a given group,or is it in reality settingup typeswhich are little more than mentalconstructs? to It seemsequally unrealistic assume thatmankind,at some timein the past, pure existed in pure or even relatively for We have no justification maktypes. ing such an assumption.The relative lack of isolation and the greatmobility found in Homo sapiens,whose legs are particularlyadapted for long distance ratherthan rapid movement, travelling thatman would indicate the possibility never developed pure racial types.As modernman spread out fromsome center of origin, whereverthis might be, under preshis groups were constantly sure fromothers to extend the migration. This processwould have brought almost continuous contact between could groups.These originalmovements hardly have stopped earlier than the beginningof the Neolithic. There may have been a few centuries here and thereof relativelystable isolation,but withthe lengthbetweenhuman generationsthiswould not have been sufficient to formeven remotely pure races. And as we approach moderntimestheredeveloped migratoryinvasions of conquest, followedby continuousadvances up to the present, in transportation Vol. 3 * No. 1* Febiuary 1962

Discussion:

ISSUESIN THE STUDYOF RACE

with the resultthat biological isolation among man is today virtuallyimpossible even forshort periods.Thus, while racial differences bethereare certainly tween peoples of different geographic environments,and while variability within any group may verywell have been less in the past than at present, thereseemslittlejustification assumin ing that there were ever pure human races. The opportunities racial forfor mation were never completelypresent in man as theywerewithotheranimals. Two other comments seem worth making.While in the historicalsection of seemsto denythevalidity Wiercifiski such as that of formerclassifications, Deniker, in his discussionof the methods developed by the Polish School he states that the latter uses the work of Deniker and othersas a basis fordetermining the areas of type "crystallizait is tion." If thisinterpretation correct, would seem that there is some inconsistency thepositiontakenbyMichalin ski and his followers. Further, entiresystem the seemsto be one in whichdata on descentgroupsare used to establishthe exact racial make up of parental groups,this latter then being used to indicate that the original guessas to therace of the descentgroup was correct. This type of reasoning would involve a logical tautology. As shown by Bielicki, Wanke's method of componentfrequencyanalysis,although containing many inherent weaknesses, would appear to be useful forthe determination intergroup of relationshipsprovided the method is used forthe purposessuggested Bieby licki and is not looked on, as Wanke, and otherswould have us Wiercifiski, do, as indicating the presence in the population of certainalleles or chromosomes.Rather than providingevidence forsome "pure type,"it should be used as a measure of the geographical distribution the various componentsin of a given population, and as a means of determiningthe historybehind these means of frequencies.It is a statistical analyzing components of populations in order to disentanglemore information from the raw data. Thus it is a techniqueimposed by man on the data and not somethingfound in the data itself. In conclusion,while we would agree that population studies leave much to in be desired,particularly the difficulty of their application to the past, they still appear to be superiorto and freer fromunfounded assumptionsthan the methods advocated by Wierciiiski. Wanke's methodof analysismay prove of considerable to racial studies, use but only if used in the sense advocated by

Bielicki, and not by means of the misinterpretations the Polish School. of [Richmond, Kentucky, 1.7.61]
By J. HIERNAUX

In my opinion, the anthropological of analysisof a population in terms the frequencies severalindividual"racial of on an entirelyunjustifiedtheoretical basis and is to be completely rejectedas a misleadingfallacy.Most of the points I could make on thissubjectare already in clearlyset forth Bielicki'spaper; this to allowsme to restrict comment the my part of the latter paper dealing with of research the parental components on a population. (I prefer avoid theword to will agree that Every anthropologist such research bears on an important factor of ethnogenesis: hybridization, one of the main forces whichact on the genetic patrimoniumof human populations. The point is, what is the best method for determiningthe compoand nents and theirrelative influence, how oftencan it be applied? Let us considerthe simplest situation, thatof a population resulting fromthe recentmixture twogroupswhich very of stillexistin an unmixed condition.Let us suppose that the numberof generationselapsed since the beginningof the hybridization so few that selectionis is not suspectedof having played a role, and that the numberof individualsinvolved is so greatthatgeneticdrift can be neglected. In such a case the best traits to use are the monogenic ones which are alwayscompletely expressed; they ar-enot subject to heterosisand theycan be used in simpleand unquestionable mathematicalformulas.(Bielicki overlooks heterosis,probably because he did not consider the case of actual hybridization.) Let us now take a slightly simple less situation: we know fromhistoricalevidence that a certain population was formed a mixture twopopulations as of establishthepercentage the twocomof answercan be hoped ponents.A correct foronly ifwe know precisely values the of the pertinenttraitsin the ancestral groups. If these groups still exist, we may use their present frequencies or meansonlyifwe are sure thatno evolution has taken place among themsince theircontribution thepopulation beto ing studied. We also have to assume a similar stabilityin the latter since its formation.The parental populations may have changed throughhybridization (mutual interbreedingwith the 29
several generations ago, and we wish to "type" for designating a mere component.) types," as advocated by Wiercifiski,rests

of group studied,for example, a frequent proved interference selectionrestrict 15 populations of a contiguousarea in occurrence),selection, or drift.If hy- the application of the componentfre- CentralAfricaand a setof data on their serologicalfeatures (ABO,MN and sickbridizationtookplace in one or both of quency analysisto a veryfewcases. Bielicki, however,believes it useful lemia), I was able to draw the following the parental populations, the case is analysis conclusions without resort to hyhopeless unless we venture a highly to apply componentfrequency hypothetical reconstruction of the "as an abstractexploratorydevice" to potheses: 1. Ten populations exhibita similar situationswhere it is impossibleto asformermeans or frequencies.Let us suppose that no importanthybridiza- certain what ancestral stocks,if any, sequence of increasingD2 with respect fits tion occurredto change thesevalues in have contributedto the formationof to the fiveothers.This perfectly a the parental groups. As Bielicki indi- the components.I cannot see the use- model of gene flowradiating fromthe whichare re- fulnessof such an analysis,which de- Tutsi group. cates,we have to use traits 2. Between related populations, dissistant to selection and drift.Bielicki parts from reality at the outset. Not believes that most morphologicaltraits onlymustit reston the suppositionthat tances for morphologyas well as for hybridization been the only acting serologicalcharacteristics correlated has are fulfill thiscondition (theymustalso be resistant to the direct moulding in- force (an assumptionseldom likely to with the time elapsed since the timeof withfanciedcom- their separationas this is known from unless we be valid), but it works fluenceof the environment, assump- ponents.It is evidentthatsound knowl- historyand glottochronology. can safely make the simplifying 3. The morphologicaldistances are tion that this influencedid not work edge cannot be gained fromsuch a procedure.It is misleadingeven foran "ex- correlatedwith the number of genetic differentially). are I agree thatpolygenictraits much ploration"of the facts;it givesno more barriersbetween the populations. than do preliminary 4. Selection is at work on the morless sensitiveto driftthan monogenic solid information directly drawnfora simpler phology of the populations that have however, hypotheses ones. It mustbe remembered, sim- examinationof the data and using non- migratedinto the equatorial forest;it thata situationproducingan effect anthropological evidence,but also runs worksin the directionof a convergence occurredin ilar to drifthas frequently the past (in the formationof many the risk of being taken more seriously with the Pygmies. 5. In Ruanda-Urundi,wherethe two Bantu speakingpopulations,forexam- because of the mathematicalelaboraple). This consistsin the departureof tion it requires. Its results will vary main groups are the Hutu and the greatly the function theimaginary Tutsi (the thirdgroup being Pygmoid), in of a small group of related people for a new habitat in which it multiplies;the components chosen; they chieflysup- the gene flowfromHutu to Tutsi has difference portwhatwas knownor assumedat the been more importantin Urundi than probabilityof a significant group and the re- beginningby the user of the method. in Ruanda, while the gene flow from betweenthe migrant mainingpopulation is as high forpoly- For example,anycomponentfrequency Tutsi to Hutu has been moreimportant analysis of the population of eastern in Ruanda. genic as formonogenicfeatures.But I Africawill be strongly af6. Part of the observed variation am not convincedthatmostmorpholog- and southern ical traitswere, during the last several fected theviewsof theuserabout the evades explanation by the known facby to ethnogenesis the "Hamitic" or "Ethi- tors (gene flow from the Tutsi, gene of thousand years, almost indifferent selection, as Bielicki believes. For ex- opid" stock. If he believes, as several flow throughthe barriers, selection in of ample, I could show a shift the mor- authorsdo, that there is an important the forest);for example, a nucleus of phologyof the Bantu tribeswho are re- "Caucasoid" componentin it, thiscom- low radiohumeralindices west of Lake to cent immigrants the equatorial forest ponent will appear in many Bantu- Kivu and a highaverageof head height of Eastern Congo toward that of the speakingpopulations; ifhe does not be- in the Rega. Possible explanations are with the absence lieve so, this componentwill be absent unknown selectiveforcesand drift(or Pygmies,contrasting and the conclusionsabout theirethno- at least the kind of drift of a similarshiftin blood groups.This resulting from will be the partingof a small group of related is absence showsthat hybridization not genesis and interrelationship Moreover, the mathematical people; Hiernaux 1956). a satisfactory explanation for the mor- different. In this area, component frequency phological shift; selection very likely apparatus of the methodis itselfincorit role within a few rect; particularly, does not take into analysiswould have overlookedmostof played a significant centuries(Hiernaux 1956). In thiscase, account the correlation between the the factsrevealed by the analysisfrom morphologicaltraitsare shown to have variables. The fact that it requires the D2 values, though three components equal to (Tutsi, "Bantu," and Pygmy)are actubeen more sensitiveto selection than use of a numberof components and it would have required were serological traits. Selection may one plus the numberof characteristics allypresent, it an arbitrary also be suspectedof being responsible showshow unsatisfactory is. definition the "typical" of We know the extentto which ethno- values of each component prior to its for the correlationbetween facial or nasal indicesand latitudefoundamong genesisis a complex process.It usually mixturewith the other two. Even if it as involves, soon as some lengthof time would start from present values for the Amerindians(Newman 1953). We do not know how long evolution took is considered,the simultaneousaction Tutsi and Pygmies (thus renouncing to form such morphologicalextremes of severalforces:selection(natural,sex- any analysis of these groups), the and drift, "Bantu" component would be quite as the Tutsi and the Pygmies, but there ual, or social), hybridization, is everyreason to believe thatselection mutation. Is it possible to reconstruct arbitrarily defined, and the results was active during the last thousand their intricateinterplayfroma set of strongly affected the means chosen. by years and still is in many populations. data on livingpopulations?If we hope Wanke's method would have allowed Bielicki wisely notes that component to approach this goal, we must start the use of only two characteristics. The frequencyanalysis is a valid tool in with a correctstatisticalexpressionof "Bantu" component falling between between populations. the Tutsi and the Pygmies in most has the differences only if hybridization racial history been the only force in action. I am The best one ever elaborated for con- measurements, two-component a analafraid it is rarely safe to assume this tinuous traits is the generalized dis- ysiswould be as logical as a three-comcondition unless in very recent mix- tance (D2) of Mahalanobis. As an exam- ponent one, but it could use only one of pie of what can be done with it, I cite variable and would lead to conclusions or tures.The difficulty impossibility definingthe parental componentswith here myown experience.From a set of veryfarfrom truthand strongly the debetween pendenton the traitused. For thoseseeexact values and the suspected or D2 values for 9 measurements 30
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

In the older countries of Europe, withoutplentyof evidence on whether and why morphologicaltypes are statistically more frequent thanchance expectation,I see littlebenefit fromarmchair reconstructions racial history. of As Bielicki says,it is futile to belabor the hypothesis close common ancesof try whenever a Pole can be matched typologically with a Berber. Unlike Bielicki,I should be surprised if the only selectively favoredmeasurementof the human body in recentgenBy EDWARD E. HUNT, JR.* erationswere the high cephalic index. Wheneveran anthropometrist thinks Malocclusion may well be anothersuch trait(Hunt 1961). Surelybrachycephalihe can definetypes a population,and in whentheyare defined from significantly zation in manypartsof the world adds of of such evi- to the difficulty tracingan affected covariantassemblages traits, dence should make him into the very human group back to its remote hispopulationist whom WierciAski be- torical origins. Bielicki's strictures on using "comlittles,and not into a conjectural hisponent frequency analysis" apply with torian (Hunt 1959). concern should be with almost equal force to any extensive His primary metrical comparisonsbetween human and differences in the mating systems fitness phenotypesin the anthropo- groups.We may thenask what thisproof metric sample. Very early, he should cedure adds to an overall estimateof such as the D2 statistic. findout whetherone or plural isolates theirunlikeness, are included in his sample, since for One answeris that such a single measmostevolutionary purposes,the isolate, ure does not show the profileof differis not the type, the essentialsomatologi- ences between two samples. Nevertheless,I am not convincedthatdifferences cal unit of discourse. in an arrayof mean measurements can For each isolate,he may begin witha fully stochasticor random model of be improvedon by recourseto compogene flow,and measure familiescover- nents which inevitablyare inventions and even ing more than one generation.Where of the investigator, sometimes of frequencies typesexceed random ex- historicalfictions. [Boston,13.6.61] pectation, he should test his data for culfitnesses phenotypes, of differential of turally explicablepatterns assortative mating,and even the less likely possi- By GABRIEL W. LASKER* There is some justice in Wierciiiski's at bilitiesof pleiotropism one locus and enumerationof four difficulties the in linkages between plural loci. of The primedifficulty such evidence application of racial data to ethnofor the racial historian is common genesis. 1. Wierciiiski'slist of types of conthat physicists: knowledgeto theoretical process cepts of race, however,refersto outantecedentstatesof a stochastic can only be definedstatistically. Fully worn approaches. Today there is a random hybridizationcan quite effec- tendencyto limit the term "race" to aspects) and to tivelyobliteratethe multipleoriginsof biology (i.e., hereditary all an isolate. Practically biased mating use-"race" (but not "racial type") to designatea breedingpopulation. Since and mechanisms would systems selective do the same. The only such process past populations as well as presentones whichcould be of help to the historian interbredto various extents,the limits and changewith would be a situation where ancestral ofracesare notdefinite therefore preferto combinationsof alleles were the very time.Many students and procwhich study racial characteristics fewout of countlesspossibilities unstable were maintained because of their su- essesratherthan the relatively in periorfitness the hybridpopulation. races. the 2. This conceptofrace eliminates I suspect that such apparent anomaanalysissince in lies of human evolution do exist.Bres- problemof typological ler (1961) has found that inter-ethnic this view, as Garn (1961) says: "Races asare natural units and not artificial in and inter-faith marriages the United infertile. Whatever semblages created by selecting 'types' Statesare relatively out of a population." Our knowledgeof its causesmaybe, thissituationis a real genetic isolating mechanism which races in this "populationist" sense is could make the national origins of limitedby the shortspan overwhichwe some groups in this country visible for can trace the actual ancestryof individuals and by the impossibility idenof many generations. Vol. 3 -No. 1 -February1962

ing two components in the Tutsi (a Caucasoid and an ancient Negro one), analysiswould be the a four-component rightone; it would lead to resultsresortingmore to fictionthan to a real analysisof the data. In conclusion, I am much less optimistic thanBielickiabout thevalue and the applicability of component frequency analysis, and I am convinced thatothermethodsof analysiscan yield much more refinedand secure results. 28.6.61] [Brussels,

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY

OF RACE

tifying limitsof long past populations. This is whymanymodernracial studies are confinedto the recent past and to the dynamics the racial process,and of treatdistant "ethnogenesis"as a problem largelyoutside the range of scientificapproach. Ancient racial histories are available only as more or less impressionistic images,oftenalong several different equally plausible lines. but 3. Wierciiiski rightin pointingout is thatthereis much thatwe do not know about the mode of genetictransmission of various characteristics whichhe calls "racial." The difficultyclearlycompliis cated by the factthat most phenotypic characteristics only in part herediare as tary, Boas (1910) and manysuccessors have shown.Besides the environmental component,lack of standardization of methods,some degree of inaccuracyin observation,and multiple overlapping genetic mechanisms impinge to render exact geneticanalysisdifficult. There is even less justificationfor genetic hypothesesabout types. 4. I agreewithWierciiiski thatracists can borrowcorrectas well as incorrect information about race and so distort and mingleit withmisinformation to as make it part of theirnefarioustheories. The onlyway to safeguardthe scientific study race is to make each stepin our of analysisso explicit that the work is capable of independent check and verification. Wierciiiski questions the independent sortingof genes. It is clear, as Bielicki notes,that neitherpleiotropynor linkage, in the genetic sense of informationaldeterminants spatiallyclose in the DNA of a chromosome, account can for continuityof types in succeeding generationsof a population. A certain in polarizationof phenotypes a population occurs because most causes of human variations have multiple effects. The elementsof a viable whole must correspondto one or another sort of equilibrium and these may tend to types.Unless selection were the same for all combinationsof genetic materials in all actual situations,the independent segregationof genetic traits would not entirelyprevent formation of types.Furthermore, anythingaccelor at erating retarding growth a particutendsto affect lar phase of development all growthcentersat a similarstage of maturationin a similarway. Thus, for instance, at the pathological extreme, cleidocranialdysostosis, whichprobably has morethanone ultimatecause, is apparentlymore immediately due to an embryological disgenesis; and thedwarfism, incompleteclavicles,short fingers and toes, open fontanelle,and failure of sutral closure,are so similar in un31

the related'casesof thisdisease thiat subjects may look like siblings.Similarly, pituitary hyperfunctionduring late stages of growthproduces a series of related changes and the syndromeof acromegaly is marked as a "type." Within the clearly normal range, too, inhibition of growth of long bones (whether genetically or environmentallymediated)has a seriesof concomitants and the stuntedindividual tends and to have a relatively to be shorter, longer trunk and shorter forearms, head, nose, and face. The extent of such mutual dependis ence of traits not adequate to account for clearcut racial types, however. Within populations, product moment of coefficients correlationbetween two rarelyreach the 0.5 level measurements unless thereis an actual overlappingof Head and facemeasurethedimensions. mentsusually show only small correlations.Between populations,correlation would depend on how the coefficients series were selected, but for random populationsthey samplesof continental do not run much higherthan forindividuals. Types, then, have, as Bielicki points out, relativelylittle biological validity even at the phenotypiclevel. as Furthermore, Garn (1961) says,"such typesas may be found in a population prove nothingabout the appearance of ancestralgroups." When it comesto the evidencewhich uses to support individual Wiercifiski one can only commentthat typology, testsare forthe degreeof the successful and are in no way internalconsistency testof thesystem. an objectiveextrinsic Hunt (1959) analyzed the individual "types"of Irish,and his data show that the traitspresentin the population are to a considerableextentindependentof each other. The weaknessof the individual typology proposedbyWiercihiski lies in the factthatthe threeconditions listedunderhis conclusion#4 are built into any typologyby assumption (b) of (that offspring parents of the same racial element also belong to it) or by selection(a) and (c) (of racial arbitrary of elementswithextremeconstellations There is and low variability). characters (b) concretedata to controvert and it cannot be shown that the limits imposed by typingaccording to (a) and segments but arbitrary (c) are anything of a continuum which includes the whole breeding population (although, of course,the surfaceof the continuum homogeneous). need not be completely I Despite thesestrictures am not undesireto drop happyabout Wiercifiski's the term "racial type" for concepts other than just such individual phenoto. typesas he refers The discussionof would be helped by racial differences thissemanticsimplification.

even Bielicki'sapproach is moreconsonant in which to view the transmission of characteristics which have not been with the frame of referencewhich I subjected to genetic study. have used in the criticism Wierciii- successfully of [Berkeley, California,29.6.61] ski's paper. Nevertheless, am not conI vinced thatWanke's methodof component frequency analysiswhich Bielicki advocateswill lead to an understanding By I. MICHALSKI* First, I would like to express the of actual biological relationships,although,as Bielicki says (p. 7) of some opinion thatI do not see anypossibility such typological analyses, "fictitious of discussingBielicki's article on the compositions, however, not without basis of concretefactual materialsince are the articleis almostcompletely lacking informative value, because as long as in such material. This enables me to the same set of points of reference ... is being consistently applied to each presentmy commenton it in the form population ... it is possible to compare of some general remarks. 1. The method of informationappopulations in regard to their morby phological structure." The question is plied by Bielicki is well-represented whether is sucha comparison as efficient an example of ratherspurious results or as meaningful a comparison the cited by him fromthe publication of as of distributions individual characteris- Kapica (Kapica 1958). "A large sample of ticsin the population. To me the only of Poles," as statedin Bielicki's article, of Ziota defensible way of studyingbiological consists 15 medievalPoles from origins is to compare remains of past (SandomierzDistrict) and of 124 indipopulations with present peoples in viduals derived fromseveral Neolithic in respect to various separate biological periodsoccurring Poland and neighboringcountries. Assigningall of them features. Bielicki'ssuppositionthat the major- to the Polish nation, as Bielicki did, is ity of human morphologicalcharacter- a singular conclusion.Also, in contraistics,includingmost of the traditional diction to the thesisadvanced by Biemeasurements and indices,are molded licki, Kapica did not distinguishany to a fargreaterextentby mixturethan representatives the Berberic "type" of by selection,drift,or mutation would but merelyseveralindividualsshowing seem to be an importantquestion for Berberichybridization. thinkthekind I investigationby both theoreticaland of informationpresented by Bielicki empirical methods. To many anthro- may be interpreted only two ways: in pologistssuch general questions as the as evidence of complete ignorance of relative taxonomic values for funda- the cited paper or as a purposive and mental or recent differentiation of of conscious distortion the data. monogenicversus polygenictraitsand 2. The level of knowledge reached of characteristics with low penetrance by Bielicki in the fieldof anthropology versus highly plastic ones, are more is reflected the remarks makes in in he to likelyto yield new insightthan further reference the cited paper of Kapica refinements racial taxonomies. of and that of Michalskidealing with the The whole question of ethnogenesis Congo natives(Michalski1957).It is not is onlycrudely couched and can onlybe strange,knowing the present trend in crudelyanswered.The processesof ra- studiescarriedon in the Wroclaw Cencial originhave alwaysbeen present-and tre,thatBielicki does not know,forexcontinue today as strongly ever. No as ample, that Bilcze Ziote is situated in population of today's generation has the ethnic, also political and, at present, any direct equivalence with any popu- territory the Ukraine, thathe recogof lation of a previous generation, for nizes the bearersof the Bell-Beakerculmany individuals will have descended tureas real Poles, and thathe does not fromsome progenitors while few will know the Africanistic studiesof Czekahave descended fromothers,and some nowskiand Henzel. It is more difficult members of the past generation will to understandthat the author,writing have left no descendants. The possi- on the anthropology middle Africa, of bilityof identity two generationsof did not read at least popular literature of a population, or any subtypeof it how- and become familiar with the words ever defined,is as remoteas the possi- "Mangbetu" and "Nyam-Nyam" the in bilityof a child's being identical with dictionariesof Meyer (1927, 1928) and its parent (which does not occur apart Banse (1923) or in the Polish Geofrom possibility parthenogenesis). graphicDictionary(1927). Then, maybe the of The usual purposeof the application his surprise the discoveries Michalat of of geneticsto raciologyis not the con- skiin the Kwilu Basin would have been struction better taxonomiesof man incomparablyslighter,especially had of in order to reconstruct withMichalski'sarethnic history- he become familiar though such a practice has sometimes gumentsin this field and, even more been followed. Rather, genetic study important, had he loyallyinformed the casts light on the modes of change in readers of CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY race and providesa frameof reference about them. If he had done this, he
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

probably would not be obliged to interpret the admixtures of the white in variety Middle Africaas an effect of convergence descended fromenigmatic genes fromquite different population pools in an indefinitearea. If so, a Nordic Bedouin whom I saw in the region of El Alamein could be the result of a fortuitous combinationof genes. In regardto thequestionof Australoids in Africa,it would be better to refer Bielicki to Henzel's papers (1934, 1950) and to Cipriani's data regardingZulu tribes(1932). 3. Bielicki's paper consists of two quite different and slightlyconnected parts. The first them is a reflection of of the author'stacticalhomage in front of panmictic,genetico-corpuscular and antitaxonomicalAmericanpopulationism which,accordingto Bielicki,is represented in its typical form by Boyd. The second part is an attemptto reclaim the so-called methodsof Wanke for the U.S.A. on the basis of a thesis thatthe notionof a type, whichis without biologicalsensewhen applied to an individual, achieves such sense when applied to a population. At the same time,Bielicki does not mentionthatin his historical paper (1958) he presented Wanke's method of surpluses as a strictly one because it gives typological "for the'first time mathematical evidence for the existenceof racial types and, at the same time,makes possible theirmathematical distinction." for He gets also to state that Wanke and his adherentsregarded quantitative taxonomical analysisof the single individual as the highestachievementof the reference points method (Czekanowski 1955; Wanke 1953 and 1955). 4. The concept of a population is used by Bielicki in a rather nebulous way. In fact,in one place what he says about Australianpopulationsis correct; but in the second case, when commenting on Birdsell'sconcepts,Bielicki uses the expression,"contemporary aboriginal population of Australia," erroneouslytreatingthe Australiannatives as a population. whichtheydo not constitute biologicallybecause theyare not one group interbreeding freely-freely, meaning not sexual promiscuity, but lack of territorial isolationor the social isolationof casteendogamy of strictly or determinedexogamous distribution. It would be interesting see how Bieto licki's arguments the subject of syson tematic distinction of a population would appear if he had takentheexample not fromAustralia but, for example, from continental Europe or the Mediterraneanbasin. Would he then tryto prove that, for example, all the WesternSlays,theirGermanneighbors, and a considerable part of Eastern Slays constituteone population since Vol. 3 No. 1 *February 1962

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF RACE

as theydo not differ among themselves all muchas the Australiannativesfrom othergroups? 5. Generally speaking,abuse of the term"population" to denote the basic object of anthropologicalstudies is a fundamentalerror if it refersto real biological population. The object of may be anthropologicalinvestigations any human group or, even a single inof dividual as a representative a given taxonomic unit, though not simply a human individual. It seems to me, for example, that to regard a series conof sisting men alone as a biologicalpopulation is disturbing arbitrariness. is It undoubtedly more reasonable to talk about a series, sample, or representatives of an ethnic, cultural, or social group rather than about the Polish, Chinese,Australian,etc. population, if maone keeps concreteanthropological terialin mind. 6. The headline "Single CharacteristicsversusComplexes of Characteristics" sounds quite empty.Actually, a featypeis not just a sum of fortuitous as turesand also not a set of features, Bielicki says when interpretingthe stand which contradicts own. his A typemay be definedas a set of individuals observedin naturewhich are similarto each other but are a specific organic whole with mutual similarities to and dissimilarities othersetsof individuals as describedby means of conventionscalled features.It is assumed that a here, as a probable hypothesis, characteristic morphologicalpicture is conditioned by a common biological descent(not social descent)and by connection with that analogical genetic structure. Bielicki's 7. In regardto thefeatures, standpointseems to be rathercomplicated. He says (p. 3), "Consequently, not a singlemetrical descriptive or trait in man is known to have a fully explained genetic background. A great majorityof such traitslack even tentativegeneticinterpretations thatpracso ticallynothingis known about them." And in another place (p. 7) he says, "If a component-frequency analysisis to be regardedas a valid researchtool in racial history, two simplifying assumptions must be tacitly made: (1) The in traits questionare .. . immuneto environmentallyinduced modifications, so that thereis a strictcorrespondence between phenotypical and genetical likeness."It would seem thatsomething hereshouldbe "consequently" rejected: the thesisabout a lack of data concerning the geneticcontentsof the features or thlemethod of Wanke II as a valid researchtool in racial history." 8. I thinkWanke's methodou,ght to

be rejected afterattestingto its genealogical connectionwithClark'smethod. thesisof Bielicki is, as it seems The first of to me, simplya laconic summary the resultsof laborious and long investigathe name of Drosophila on theheredity of man. I do not thinkthat it is pessiwill misticto believe thatthissummary be truealso forthe next 50 yearsif the object of investigation will remain and not morphologsingle"characters" ical types.Bielicki, perhaps, is of this same opinion (tacitly)when he triesto grafton American ground the "methods" of Wanke whichoperate by means of sets of charactersanyway.As mentioned already,the object of investigamay tionsof any biosystematics be only existing individual organismsor their organized complexesbut not the char. acterswhich do not exist independent of individuals.Taxonomic features (in practice always the same) are only a of kind of alphabet for the description a typeand forrepresenting under these same symbols (for example, concave nose, eye nr. 3 of Martin scale, black geneticcontents hair,etc.) the different in the Lapponoid, Negroid, Highland or Berberic race. The object of purinanthropogenetic posive and fruitful can be only a taxonomical vestigations formulation man, not his hair and of eye color, stature,or cephalic index. Therefore, I think, if corpusculary orientedgeneticists would publishtheir human families(if materialconcerning theypossess the data and if theywere gathered by a more modern method than that used by Boas), one could atof tempt to prove the superiority the genetic typological concept over the corpuscularin the fieldof human taxonomy.Presentscantybut existingeviof dence of the correctness thisconcept, as demonstrated Wiercinski(1958), by Of is on the side of typologists. course, should sample and Polish typologists data as possible publish as much family to give corpuscularyoriented geneticians the opportunityfor penetrating of criticism typology. Only thiskind of materialbasis will removethe character from of speculationand fideism present 9. An especially fruitlessand even logically absurd conception is necessitatedbyBielicki'sprocedureof treating a population "as elementaryunits of variation."If accordingto intraspecific the antitypologists taxonomicalunitsdo thenwhere not existas distinguishable, of is the superiority populationsin this respect,since even such a determined advocate of populationism as Bielicki doesn't know verywell what a population is? Also it seems to me that every 33
discussions. tions of corpusculary genetics under

man of average common sense would distinguish somatictypeof Bielicki the and Michalskibetterthan the averages of Polish, Czech, or any East German population, if it is accepted that they are biological populations at all. Actually,withineach biological or statistical population thereexistsa numberof different morphological types incomparthan even ably moreeasyto distinguish neighboringpopulations. Finally, is a We type indistinguishable? know with that individualsare quite discertainty to tinguishable.Also, it is not difficult establishgroupsof individualswho are similar to one another. Of course,not all of us can do it equally well but all are physicians not equally good diagnosticiansalso and in spite of thatfactnothe bodycontradicts actual existenceof of diseases. The history anthroposystegiven matics teaches that information by men trained in taxonomyhave usat ually been in agreement, least in outline. It should not be easy to establish of espethe affinities some mixed types, cially those with a prevalence of comin ponents,but difficulty distinguishing mixed fruit different juices bysightand taste does not prove the non-existence of thesejuices. It is clear enough thatthe acceptance of a population as the unit of intraspecific variationwould be a quite illogical of replacement a simple, and groundless verypreciseelementby one thatis very to complicatedand difficult use in comparisons. 10. With regardto the question of a completeindependentsortingof genes influence of and the threat thefrequent on of crossing-over hereditary processes in man, as Boyd sees it, and following him at least in the first partof thequestion, Bielicki, in the light of data actheseconceptsare cessibleto typologists, no more than strongbeliefs.Similarly, the idea (until now purelytheoretical) of of theinfluence theexternalenvironment which, erroneously,forms the hereditary processclearlyhampersBielicki's opinions, althoughhe speaks directly only about the selectiveaction of It environment. would be nice, if the theseideas would pubside propagating lish some demonstratabledata which could convincethe skepticaltypologists of For theinterpretation in thisrespect. of so-calledbrachycephalization a population of ContinentalEurope as the result of selection directed against dolicocephaly conceived as a concrete (monometric?)feature is an achievement that can only be compared with the famous hypothesisof the transformation dominationin the timeof of Czekanowski (1930). The thesis adWhite from vanced byBielicki,inferred what Russian material,ably contradicts he says in other places in his article
34

about the resultsof Negro-Whitecontact as well as what he says about the northernPolish population. There he emphasizes the complexityof changes resultingfromcrossings. whatwe knowabout This contradicts the anthropologicalstructureof early and late Medieval populations,namely, the taxonomicand non-monocharacter existingbetween this popudifferences lation and a population fromthe later to periods. It would also be difficult doubt that if Bielicki would make simof ilar investigations the head, for example, or of nasal index, he would reach the same conclusions.In general, of the interpreting brachycephalization regardto thePolish population without the many complex factorssuch as recolonizationof desertedregionsdue to wars and natural causes during the Middle Ages (Tartar inroads, pestietc.) and theurban lences,famineyears, revolution which quickly and deeply changed the mode of life of the people of is an over-simplification theproblem. Also the disappearance of cremation led to the incorporationof rare types into craniological series since burial favoured posthumousselection of the massive and dolichoid skulls derived from cromagnoidand highland races. to These skullsweredeformed a greater extentthan otherskullswhichwerenot and hard graves. preservedby coffins in The possibility differences fertility of anthropologicaltypesand in different in of differences the sustenanceof their selective which is remarkably offspring, livingconin primitive and unhygienic ditionswas not takeninto account. to 11. It does not seem necessary devote much more attentionto Wanke's about the methods.I can writebriefly method of stochastic correlations (Wanke 1952, 1953) which represents merelya variantof the methodof surpluses well-known in anthropology. anthrothe Furthermore, well-observed pological typesdo not need any statistical proof (since theyare well though seen in Upper Paleolithic schematically withman) and have been distinguished out the use of any calculation. An exception,perhaps,is the pygmicrace of Henzel. Wanke's mathematicalsuccess would have been incomparably greater into cateif,usinga divisionof features gories as establishedby morphologists, he had demonstrated non-existence the of taxonomical differentiation within mankind which populationists seem to theoretically believe. It may also be understoodthat a taxonomicalunit is not, in its essence,a statisticalnumerical surplus but an independent bioof logical reality thata representative so the Sudanese race which,gettinginto a Polish series,would have disappeared groups of withouttrace in 5-characters

Wanke did not loose by it its determined and incontestable distinctness. It is sufficient say about the referto ence pointsmethod (Wanke 1955) that it is meaninglessand fully erroneous from the point of view of biological because it may give,in contaxonomy, nection with the assumed quality and quantityof a priori establishedparameters, an infinite number of resolutions, while the biological method should give only one possible and true resolution. Also, this method is erroneouslylimited to only 5 characters and must give resultscontradictory to simple observationsdue to the greater numberofnecessary taxonomicfeatures. In no case have betterresultsbeen obtained by use of thismethodthan have been obtained by means of the "primitive"morphological method, thatany so time used in its calculative manipulations may be recognizedas needlessly lost. Concerning this view I may cite the examples of the contradictory results which are included in the papers of Czekanowski(1953, 1954,and 1955), Paszkowski,and Warmus (1956), and Wanke (1953 and 1955). 12. In presenting standof "primithe it tive and traditional"morphologists, should be recognizedthat theyregard the principal and fullygenuine taxonomic units of mankindas distinguishable and well-described. They ascribe to theseunits the possibility repeatof ing theirown typein homogamiccrossings as may be inferred the basis of on familydata that are not numerousbut concrete. The formswhich show the characters at least two of such comof ponents are recognisedas hybridtreating; however,all the geneticformulas, as workinghypotheses, need empirical verification. These morphologists recognize also that distinguished typeshave a logical and regular distributionin time and space. The most important task is the observationof regularities in in occurring the offspring relationto the parental typesand not speculative and fruitless of investigations the mechanics of transmitting single features. The basic and elementary object of investigations ought to be the human individual regardedas a representative of a well-defined and distinguishable taxonomic unit. The group structureis of expressedin theform racial composiof tion,i.e., the percentfrequencies the occurence of principal components among individuals in agreementwith Michalski's method (also called the "halving" method),firmly emphasizing that it has only qualitative and not quantitativemeaning. The progress of anthroposystematics should not be based on permanent distinction wellof known typesby use of statistical methods but it should be expressedin better
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

knowledgeof the lines of theirdifferentiation and in deeper, more accurate investigationsof their morphological and functional characteristics.The meaningand scope of such studieswere presentedby Michalski (1946). Finally not exthe "primitive"morphologists of cludingfuturepossibilities taxonomical statisticalmethodsor the achieveconsider genetics, mentsof corpusculary presentresultsof both thesedisciplines in not only lacking in real significance the developmentof anthropologybut playing, next to populationistic conhamperingdecepts,the role of factors velopmentin the presentstateof progress. In their research,morphologists withoutthe intervenget by excellently or tion of anthropostatistics corpuscuas larygenetics, is proved by the example of the Cromagnoid race, adopted afterlong oppositionby Polish anthrocarefully Finally,it seemsto me,after reading Bielicki's article,thatit is difficult not to feel convincedthatBielicki conin has demonstrated a satisfactorily vincingway that his knowledgeof the in principlesof systematics general,and of human taxonomy in particular,is rather slight. This is not strange because, as may be seen fromhis bibliography,lacking papers dealing with sysdata, he and based on concrete tematics findshimself,in undertakingto write the article,in the position of a homeopath amateur writing a specialized treatisein the fieldof surgery.
[Warsaw, 25.9.61] postatisticians.

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF RACE

By A. E. MOURANTA on In commenting Bielicki's paper I must make it clear that I write as a in interested apblood group serologist plying blood grouping methods and other genetical techniques to anthropology,and thatI have no professional or knowledgeeitherof anthropometry While I am in complete agreement on footnote the withBielicki'slong first taxonomicvalue of geneticalcharacters of all kinds,thereis much withwhichI of disagreein his assessment therelative kinds of characvalues of the different ters,particularlywith regard to their or stability labilityover long periodsof time. Of the fourmain processeswhereby of theobservablecharacteristics a population may change,a singlemutationis likelyto be less obvious in the case of a such as skullshape polygeniccharacter, or skin colour,than in thatof a singlegene character (or, more strictly,a single-locuscharacter) such as a particular blood group. However, since a everyone of the loci controlling polygenic character will probably in the Vol. 3 *No. 1 February1962
of statistics.

while thelatterare completely different and non-African, showingrathera resemblance,though not a close one, to the Melanesians. Again, in the case of the American Negroes, where history, morphology, and single-gene characters concur as to their origin, it is to the single-gene characters, especially the blood groups,thatwe mustturnforan estimateof the proportions the comof random fluctuation (or genetic drift), ponentsin the mixed population. I am not competentto criticisethe are while polygeniccharacters likelyto have remainedmuch more stable,even methodological basis of Wanke's though the frequenciesof some of the method of analysis,but it has the apindividual genes involved have prob- pearance of being too simple to take However,the adequately into account the verycomaffected. ably been greatly (blood characters numberof single-gene plex genetical mechanisms involved in plasma proteins, the interbreeding populations.Howgroups,haemoglobins, of etc.) now available for taxonomicpur- ever there now exist a considerable posesis now approaching20, whichmay number of interbred populations, well be comparablewithor even exceed many of themconsisting of exclusively some of two componentseach originallyfairly the numberof loci controlling homogeneous,where genetic driftand the major polygenic characters.Thus random fluctuation, while it may naturalselectionhave scarcely had time greatlyaffecta few of the single-gene to operate, so that blood group freis systems, likely to leave still recog- quency studies should give a reliable nizable the total genetic picture given estimateof theirquantitativecomposiby all these systems taken together tion. In these cases Wanke's method (blood groups,haemoglobins,etc.) just could readily be checked against gene as it leaves recognizablethe total mor- straightforward frequency calculation. phological picture. What is needed in the long run,howIn relation to natural selection there is every reasonto thinkthata polygenic ever,is a techniquefordealing withthe or like stature skincolourwill population geneticsof metricalcharaccharacter be selectedforor against as a whole by terswhich is based directly upon modern genetical theory, and which will conditions,and thus all environmental the genes involved are likelyto change take into account the factthatnot only in frequencyto an extent comparable do several separate genes affectone char- character, but that nearly every one of with that shown by a single-gene these genes affectsseveral characters. acter such as a blood group. Many The firstneed is thus for a renewed indeed,regardblood groupsin workers, general as being almostneutralin rela- well-coordinated attack, on a large tion to natural selection, and hence scale, on the geneticsof human polymore stable than morphologicalchar- morphiccharacters individual famiin lies. I do not know whetherthe matheacters. betweentwo (or more) matical basis for planning such an Interbreeding investigation exists,or whetherthe yet populations will affectpolygenic and need is fornew fundamental charactersto a comparable first work single-gene extent,but only in the case of single- on the theoreticalside. The project as a whole,however,if carriedinto effect, gene charactershave we at present a mathematicaltechnique for ascertain- would be of untold value to both huas ing the proportionsin which the two man geneticsand anthropology well enteredthe mix- as to medicine and public health. (or more) components ture. [London, 26.6.61] Thus, in my opinion, polygenicand characterseach have a dissingle-gene For in- By L. OSCHINSKY* tinctvalue in human taxonomy. Both these articles reflecta general stance,to take one of Bielicki'sown examples, morphologyundoubtedlytells concernwithproblemsof the choice of in us more (for the moment,at any rate) characteristics taxonomic analysis. or about the relationshipbetweenAmeri- Sub-specific racial classification precan Indians and Asiatics than do the sents very special difficulties, brought characters. However,in the about in part bythelimitedpossibilities single-gene within a species itself. case of the morphologically similar for difference Bushmenof South West Africaand the The choice of taxonomiccharacteristics Onges of the Andaman Islands, blood has too often been fraughtwith subgroupsshowthe former be related to jectivity. Measurements,indices, skin to all the otherpeoples of tropicalAfrica, color, blood groups,and the abilityto 35

mutalong run be thesiteof as frequent tions as the single locus controllinga single-genecharacter,the ultimate effectsin the two cases may not be very quantitatively. different where a population has, Admittedly, at one or moreperiods,been reduced to very small numbers,single-genecharactersmay have altered greatlyin frequency or disappeared as a result of

ence-point methodto detectinterpopulation relations. Especiallyvaluable is the first section whereBielickiseemsto demonstrate the reasonable view thatpolygenicfeatures providemuchmoredata concerning the history a population because of their of being less effected selectionpressure by or geneticdrift. This point clearly shows thatthe sharp attackby certainmodern anthropologists upon the classic racial has morphologicalcharacteristics been too hastyand premature.Excellent examples supportingBielicki's view may be found in Hrdlicka's studies on the Asiatic origin of American Indians, as well as those of Oschinskyon Bantu tribes.These studiesshowed the methof odological superiority classic racial traitsto such simplemonogeniccharactersas blood groups,in comprehending betweenpopthehistorical relationship The knowledge of the mode of inulations. heritance of a trait is in no way conTherefore, one wonderswhyBielicki, nected with its diagnostic value. It goes in the nextpartof his article, maintains withoutsaying that polygenetictraits, the populationist position and essays are more useful harsh criticism individual typology. due to their stability, of than monogenetic traits, which are If it is possible to pose such an implicamore subject to geneticdriftand other tion as: the morepolygeniccharacteristicsthereare the greaterthe amountof agents of change. be- informative the Bielicki statesthat any difference materialconcerning histween Mendelian populations is, by toryof a population, then I am unable racial. This remarkis as ill- to understandwhy this should lead to definition, chosen as sayingthat any similarity be- the rejection of individual typology. tweentwo Mendelian populations-e.g. The meaning of type includes most similarityof cephalic index between polygeniccharacteristics. Consequently, EasternArcticEskimosand Australian population structurecan best be deAborigines-is an indicationof definite scribedin the form thefrequency of disracial relationship. tribution setsof features, of whichin an Bielicki also describes my concern economical,thoughto some extentdiswith "diagnostic" and "undiagnostic" tortedway,ensuresthatthe racial comas of features a reflection "typologically position is meaningful when conceived
36

taste certain chemicalshave enjoyed a certainvogue in theirtime,oftenat the expense of commonsense. All of these to voguesattempted explain muchmore thanwas possible,and all of themshare several shortcomings. overThus, theyneglectthe frequent lapping within the human species of which need not indicate characteristics intimate relationship,e.g. dolicocephaly among the Eskimos and the Australian Aborigines, or similar ABO blood groupsamongtheDravidiansand the Egyptians. It has also been claimed that thereis diagnosticvalue in one or several feato tures,withoutreference the pattern, mosaic,or complex of traitsin a racial group. To be diagnostica featuremust in not only have a high frequency the but group it distinguishes also mustbe relativelylimited to that group. Eskihave a highfrequency mos,forinstance, of gonial eversion and zygo-maxillary with They share the former protrusion. many other groups,but zygo-maxillary tuberosity limited to them and the is Siberia. tribesof northeastern of High frequency a characteror its simple Mendelian mode of inheritance is not in itselfa guaranteeof relationlevel, unless the ship at the sub-specific distributionof the character is geographicallylimited. At the subspecific betweenracial groups level, differences are so small that one cannot be sure whetheroverlapping is due to intraspecificlimitation of possibilityor to immediategenetic relationship. In otherwords,classifications should of include graded seriesor a hierarchy of in racial characteristics terms genetic instabilityand anthropogeographical variability. Bielicki takesme to task forwhat he claims is a direct quotation, namely, thatmonogenictraits have "lowertaxonomic value." What I did say was that "Monogenic serologicalfactorsdo not, value." have racial taxonomic ipso facto,

oriented anthropologyinterestedprimarilyin classification." thisI reply To

that all scientific endeavor must concern itself with classification. Classifica-

tion is the interpretation geneticor of based upon phylogenetic relationships, characteristics held in common.Deciding whether commoncharacteristics the are due to common ancestry (phylogeny) or to superficialtypological resemblance (parallelism)is a fundamental aspect of scientific activity.
[Ottawa, 12.7.61]

By

ANDRZEJ

WIERCI'NSKI

Bielicki's article includes some fresh and veryinteresting ideas on problems of typology well as somemethodologas ical solutionsthat are, in my opinion, It rathererroneous. maybe dividedinto threeparts of unequal value: (A) constructive, yielding a new and general concept of the use of polygeniccharactersfromthe genetical standpoint; (B) critical,dealing with individual typological analysis at present and; (C)
methodological, proposing the refer-

as the relativeempiricalfrequencies of extremecombinations features. of Another question arises concerning the genetic interpretation the morof phologicaltypesdistinguished means by of individual diagnosis. Logically, it should be based on a generalhypothesis of a kind of linkagebetweenthegenetic determinants racial features. of The argumentsadvanced by Bielicki against thisworking hypothesis seem to be completelya priori and unsound,with the exception of his criticism Czekanowof ski'sLaw of Frequencyof Types forbeing based on too simple an assumption of pleiotropy.One of his arguments is based on Waliszko'spaper,but thiscannot be regarded as a serious statistical disproofof the associationof morphological traits because it does remove Pearsonian correlationstogetherwith the stochasticcorrelations. a result, As a considerablemajority thestochastic of associations have also disappeared. MoreoverWaliszko'spaper did not use the proper coefficients Pearsonian of correlations but merelythe veryrough correlations of Bravais, which were based on four-fold tables.In any event, even after Waliszko's operations, the significant surplusesdid not completely disappear.I maysite the completely opposite resultsof the studyby H. and Z. Szczotka (1959) in which the places of significant surpluses correspondingto characteristics elementsof the Comof parative Morphological School were well demonstrated. Anothertheoretical question slightly touchedupon byBielickiis theproblem of theactionof the crossing-over process whichdisrupts autosomiclinkages.Consideringthisproblem in a purelytheoreticalmannerI mayreferto the equations given by Geppert and Koller (1938). From these it followsthat the time lapse in achieving random equilibrium of the two linked characters owing to the processof crossing-over is connected to the distances between theirloci in a chromosome. The sample values of Table 1 may be presented respectively. On the otherhand the interesting results obtained by E. B. Ford may be
TABLE

1 5 95 77.4 59.1 10 90.4 59.9 34.9 100 36.6 0.6 0.003

-

n C%0 1K 5 10 1 99 95 90 2 98 90.3 81

50

50

25

3.1

0.1

--

c denotes distance; thenumber the n, ofgenerations; in thetablecolumns and aregiven valuesof (1-c)n. the
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

cited. He comes to the followingconclusion: "There will be a tendencyfor geneswhich interact a favorableway in to becomelinked.The cross-over values betwen them will then be reduced by further selection"(1960:191). There are many examples of the adaptative values of racial characteristics in man (Garn and Coon 1954) whichseem to apply to ethnogenesis in view of linkages,when following Ford's results. Concluding these remarks,I think that Bielicki's severe criticismof the concept of linkages in raciologyis not .so "undoubtedlysound." Bielicki's argumentsare particularly erroneous when he enters the hard groundof facts, citingtheresultsof the typological analyses presented by Kapica (1958) and Michalski (1957). First,I was greatlysurprisedto note that Bielicki could so easily establish the ethnic affinities the serieselaboof rated by Kapica as Poles, since they mainlydate fromthe Neolithic period. Secondly,the Berbericelementis not limited only to the area of Mediterranean Africabut is spread over Western Asia and is especially frequentin the Dravidian tribesof India. Finally, the stronger occurrence thiselement of among the skulls fromthe Bell-Beaker culturein Poland is simply good anthropological evidenceforthe southernorigin of its bearers which is well documentedby archeologicaldata. I also do not see any disagreement withhistorical events in the results (Michalski 1957) obtained by typing Congolese tribes. There are quite logical connections between findingadmixturesof Mediterranean,Oriental, and Berberic elements and the historically known influence of Portuguese, Arabs, and Hamitic tribes.Finally, there remains the question of applyingthe referenceof point methodto investigations interpopulation relationship. First,I should like to remarkthat the equations proposed by Bielicki for Wanke's method have nothingformally commonwith in Wanke's equation, whichwas presented in the followingform: f
a.-

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY

OF RACE

of ax denotes the relative frequency x element; a., the value of n featureof mean the elementx; pn, the arithmetic

(a, - pi)'+ (a2-p2)

+....

(a.-p.)2;

ten jointly with mathematician L. Szczerbal. A general conclusion that may be inferred all theseequations for is that theydo not make it possible to obtain the relativeamountsof elements of a population on the basis of its arithmetical means. This statementcontradicts the view expressed by Bielicki, which may be illustratedby the example of the artificialpopulation whose averages are computed on the assumption of its having an intermediate position between the two elements: Mediterranean(e) and Lapponoid (1). So, if the reference-point methodpermits the 1 system of anthropological elements calculation of the relative frequencies may generallybe presentedin the formof in a matrix M in which the columns corre- of its componentelements, this case spond to particular elementsand the rows thereshould be 50% of elemente and to their characters. 50% of 1. However,aftercomputations A2......Am At we obtain: a, 11%; e, 29%; h, 12%; t12 . t1l b, tm 1, 29%; p, 19% according to Kocka's lii, t22 . . . . 2r t121 equation (Kocka 1958: 78) or, when . (1) M=........ Bielicki's equation is applied, still anotherresult, namely:a, 17%; e, 23%; h, bn tlm tl t12..... 17%; 1, 23%; p, 19%. Both resultsare Let m denote an m-dimensionalvectorand far from the expected frequenciesof n an n-dimensionalvector.Let us say that 50% each fore and for 1.A severecritthe pair of vectorsm and n correspondto icismof Wanke's method fromthe ana population if the i-coordinateof the mn of vectoris the relativefrequency i-element thropological standpoint has recently been presentedby Debetz (1958). Also, in the population, and the j-coordinate of the n vectoris the mean of the j-featureof I critically analysedthismethodin one If the pair m and n corre- of the population. my mostrecentpapers (1961) reachsponds to a population, then ing the followinggeneral conclusions: rn-M = n (2) (a) the methodoperatesonly witha set Let H denote any analytical function of of veryfewmetriccharacters, omitting Let us consider the equation n-variables. otherimportant diagnosticfeatures;(b) H (mnM) = n * (3) the quantity and definitions racial of This is equivalent to the equation elementsare freelychosen for a given [H (in -M) _]2 (4) population; (c) the method does not The expressionon the left side of equation (4) is the analytical functionof n-vari- take into account the plasticity charof ables. This fLinction may always equal 0 or, acteristicsof racial elements; (d) the in the sample of measure,never.Thus, for method is burdened by the connection each analyticalmethodof calculatingracial withaveragetypeof a population,with compositionon the basis of the averagesof all its consequent inconveniences. a population, if there exists one point not satisfyingequation (4), where H denotes Of course, all these statements conthat method, then the vectors m corre- cern the presentforms the method. of sponding to concrete populations do not menMany examples of the statements the satisfy equation, i.e., iffora given racial tioned above are found in Kocka's compositionthereis computed a mean of a characterof a population and then a racial paper (1958) dealing with the ethnois conmposition calculated using the method genesis of Europe. I may cite a few of from mentioned above, it will be different them as illustrations. The ancient Ibethe isstued composition.The equations prefrom rians, for example, do not differ sented by A. Wanke, W. Kocka, and T. Bielicki are analytical and, because there the early medieval inhabitantsof the exist certain vectors which do not satisfy Sandomierz region, Lithuanians from the conditionsof equation (4), the vectors Great Poland, or ancient Scythsfrom of the space of racial composition with a probability equal to 1, do not satisfythis medieval Radom (Poland).
of n feature of a population; f, the factor reducing all equations to unity or or 100%, and where al+a2+:::+ax,=1 100%. But, it should be emphasized that Bielicki's equation is mathematically sounder if the method has to express the geometrical distance in Cartesian co-ordinates. A more detailed description of some mathematical aspects of the reference-point method in all its present variants (Wanke, Kocka, Bielicki) is given below 1 as a footnote writequation. [Warsaw, 25.7.61]

Vol. 3 -No. 1 -February1962

37

Reply

By TADEUSZ BIELICKI But it should be tional anthropology. rememberedthat there is hardly any biological concept, especially among by those characterized a high degreeof of which in the history biogenerality, has not, at one time or logical thought another, been a source of confusion: "adaptiveness," "plasticity," "race," "panmixis" may serveas examples.Yet renderthese thisdoes not automatically concepts unserviceable. Misnomers creep into everybranch of science but or are oftenretainedfortheirhistorical operationalvalue. A typein traditional delimited, was a strictly anthropology group made up of all inmonomorphic dividuals, regardless of their ethnic origin,who met certainmorphological to specifications, the exclusion of all otherswho did not. The biological validityof this concept has been sharply on criticized the ground that no breeding population is known to correspond to any singletypeand thatit is veryunimpossible, likely, if not theoretically that such monomorphic populations had ever existed.Thereforesuch types had to be conceived of as segmentsof populations, and it can be shown stathatin a panmicticpopulation tistically have no real existsuch segment-types ence. Consequently the concept itself, as well as the researchprocedurebased have been on it, i.e. individual typing, denounced as meaninglessand rightly misleading.Yet I am still inclined to coninsistthattypeis not a meaningless cept if one refersit not to a group of variouspopulaindividualspickedfrom liketionson the basisof morphological ness,but to the breedingpopulation as a whole. I draw attention to the fact thatthiskind of "typologicalthinking" has apparently been found quite acceptable and operationally useful by the proponentsof modern systematics, in too: it is clearlyreflected the widely To used conceptof polytypism. say that a species is polytypicmeans nothing else but thatit is subdividedintoa number of populations which differfrom one another in sets of characteristics, i.e. in type. Abbie is obviously right of thatthinking popuwhenhe remarks lations in termsof typesmakes no provision for the phenomenon of intrae.g. group variability, forthe factthat, "in practicallyeveryAusas he asserts, tralian tribe" hair varies in formfrom to straight curled and browridgesfrom veryheavy to absent.This only goes to prove that any method of betweengroup comparisoninto which informavariabilitycan be tion on intra-group fed is superior to methods utilizing mean or modal values only. But no should be suspected of anthropologist

however, The tone of most comments, clearly indicates that "populationists" have, on thewhole,remainedconspicuously unimpressed by that "moderation." Advocatesof individual typology (though none of them has responded comment)are, I am told, witha written but of course for equally dissatisfied say.I sharethe usual fateof all middlebut I of-the-roaders:can expect nothing fromboth sides. Garn is very criticism right indeed when he remarks that too, "moderation, has itsdrawbacks.. ." Actually,however,it was not my intention to advocate any middle course and betweenthe new systematics traditional typology.Nor was it, by any means,my intentionto assistWierciias ski in his defenseof typology, some
comimentators seem to suspect. I most emphatically agree with Dobzhansky's opinion that in the history of physical anthropology, types and typological reasons. Thus, one might quite different

as "a very moderate middle course."

Garn has summed up my proposals

of the fallaciousness of the typological approach in human taxonomy than an anthropologist educated and working in Poland, where this approach has therefore,all its defects have manifested themselves in a particularly glaring My only aim was to describe a certain

thinkinghave done more harm than good. To thisI mayonlyadd thatprobably no one can be more acutelyaware

been carriedto the extremeand where, form.

methodof analyzsimple,mathematical on ing population structure the basis The method of setsof continuoustraits. has been devised, refined, and emand the resultsit ployed by typologists; has yielded have always been interpreted in termsof "individual racial taxonomy."Yet, it seemed to me that d2spite such a highlydisreputableanthe method in question points cestry, up a line of approach which can, with be certainreservations, adapted to the of general framework modern anthropological thinking and which, therefore, merits the considerationof stuI dentsof racial history. did not suggest that the purpose of the method is, as Lasker implies, to reconstructethnic "better by history meansof constructing taxonomies"; the method simplydoes not aim at settingup new taxonomies. What I did say was that its purpose is to help to reconstructethnic history of throughthe investigation the composition of populations. Both "population composition"and "type,"thetwomain conceptson which fell into disreWanke's approach rests, nlutebecause of their misuse in tradi38

being so naive as to thinkthatthestatement:"Population X is characterized by a combinationof traits b, c" is equiva, alent to a statement:"Every member of population X possessesa combinationof traits b, c." It is an undeniable a, fact that all populations are polymorphic withregardto manymorphological traits.But these polymorphicpopulationsoftendiffer strikingly modal or in mean type,and this,too, is a perfectly meaningful statement about facts. Nor can I see anyreasonwhytheconcept of population compositionshould be looked at withdistrust. Many human groups are known to be fairlyrecent blendings of two or more ancestral stocks.It is a perfectly legitimatequestion to ask in what proportionsthese stocks have entered a given mixture. Attemptsto answer such questions on thebasis of blood group data have been undertaken numerous and on occasions, special mathematicaltechniques have been developed forsuch purposes.Why should it be considerednonsensical to additional information on tryto extract suchproblems utilizing, Garn puts by as it, "incompletelyanalyzed,but largely hereditable, morphological traits"?It goes withoutsayingthatcharacters like skin color, body height,head form,or nasal breadth would yield much more accurate and solid informationhad their mode of inheritance been fully understoodand gene frequencies available. But racial historianscan not go into a state of suspended animation until the geneticistshave completed their work in this field which,by the way,does not seem likelyto happen in the foreseeablefuture. So much for generalities.Turning now to some more specificissuesraised by the commentators: 1. Boyd states that the term "polygenic" has a "definitetechnicalmeaning" and thatI have misusedit "instead of the termcorrectly used by Birdsell whichwas 'multifactorial.'" far as I As know both terms are strictly synonymous, (cf. Caspari 1958: 122; Stern 1960: 351),and differ onlyin etymology: one combines a Greek prefixwith the word "gene," the other an equivalent Latin prefix with the word "factor."In my article the terms "polygenic" or "multifactorial"meant controlled by many (or at least two), independently and additivelyacting loci. segregating This seems to be the generallyknown, standard meaning of these adjectives, and this,by the way,is how theyseem to have been understood all commenby tatorsexcept Boyd. I confessthatI was not aware thatsomegeneticists assignto the term"polygenic"a narrower meaning. 2. The contention that polygenic
(Continued on page 41)
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

Reply

By A. WIERCINSKI foundation of populationism and at the same time answersBielicki's objection that other ideas such as microevolution are responsiblefor populationism. Bielicki'sreasoning,in thiscase, is evasion than a more a terminological

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF RACE

I am very happy that the opinions included in my short and general article have provoked such strong and sharp discussion.Of course,criticalremarks were to be expected since the individualist concept of race is now shared by only a minorityof anthropologists living in Poland, CzechosloI vakia and Hungary.Nevertheless, too feel a "disdain" and "sorrow" (Garn's expressions) after reading the comments,which deal with the subject for the most part in a highlyspeculative way. This situation only validates my thesisthat the populationistconceptof taxonomicunit is race as an elementary based more on speculative thinking than on factualevidence. misunderstandSome terminological ings obscure the whole discussion,perhaps because myviewswere not always clearly.I will try describedsufficiently here,in to presentthemmoreexplicitly my order to clarify position. seemed 1. Almost all commentators to forgetthat the main purpose of my metharticle was to consider different ods of racial analysisof human populations in relation to their ethnogenesis and thatthegeneralconclusionwas that is individual typology superior to the method. average-type Regarding the purpose of any classiI fication accept a purelyformalstandpoint, i.e., everykind of classificatoiy scheme, when logically correct, may possess a pragmatic value in relation to the aims whichit should perform. There is no proof that logicallycorrectapplicationsof individual typology conclusions, led to false ethnogenetical i.e., conclusionswhichwould not agree linethnographical, with archeological, guistic,historicalor other non-anthropological evidence. The objection raised by Garn about "Australoids" marchingover the South Pole, "Semto ites" migrating Papua, "Koreans" to Kalahari and so on means only that a non-individualist, incorrect typology was applied. The terms"Semites" and "Koreans" used by Garn have no typological meaning in the individualist sense. The question of Pitcairn also raisedbyGarn has onlyverbalvalue unless proper typologicalanalysis of individual data is made and showsdifferhistory ences fromthewell-documented of theseislanders. have 2. A majorityof commentators objected to the individualistconceptin racial typologyon the basis of indeof pendentsorting a greaternumberof the genes determining classicracial features (Dobzhansky,Gain, Givens and Lasker). This demonstratesmy thesis that just this assumption lies at the Vol. 3 *No. 1 -February1962

lem of calculatingso-calledracial composition, a detailed objection is adserious objection since microevolutionvanced by Dobzhansky, Garn, and connectedwith the pop- Boyd as to whether individualsassigned aryhypotheses ulationistconceptare also based on the to the Mediterranean type in Poland and Italy are identical genetically. I assumption of independent sorting.I may add also that I completelyfail to do not know whetherall of themhave understand the noetical sense of Bie- identical genotypes with respect to that"racial differences Mediterranean features, because this licki'sstatement are producedby forces operatingon the must be concretely studied; I must asgene pools of populations ratherthan sume only that their strikingphenoon genotypes individuals,and hence typical similarity a number of feain of are such differences of an inter-popula- tures reflectstheir genetic proximity tional rather than an intra-populational ratherthan distance in relation to the nature" (p. 21). It seems to me rather individuals assigned to other types in mystical.Population is nothing more both populations. The occurrence in in- Poland of a Mediterranean constellathan a group of freely interbreeding dividuals; all the evolutionaryforces tion of characterswith all their dein rivatesis quite consistent act upon them and this is reflected with archeothe gene pool of a population. But logical evidence,i.e. with the invasion natural selectionoperatesnot on genes of agricultural neolithic Danubian but on phenotypesas Boyd correctly tribes. The misunderstandings pointsout in his comment. which arose mustoccur be- in relation to the question of racial 3. Genetic differences tween single individuals, types, and composition are especially prominent populations. In connectionwith this I in Hiernaux's comment (he rejects it which is notice a misunderstanding Here I repeat thatracial onlyverbally). most sharplyrevealed in Dobzhansky's compositioncalculated by the halving comment. Dobzhansky, Givens and or equal proportions methodis, at the Boyd seem to regardMichalskiand my- presentlevel of our geneticknowledge, selfas directdescendantsof Czekanow- nothing more than a convenient and ski's School and as fbelieversin all its economical way to describephenotypibasic genetic assumptions.It is quite of cal variability a population in terms two human of extreme constellations of classic evident to me that finding identicalwith racial features. individualsgenotypically This is simpletruth conrespect to all their innumerable fea- trolledstatistically the so-calledlaw by tures (with the exception of identical of anthropological arithmetic mean aptwins) is highlyimprobable,but what plied to all the characterstaken into of that? First,it is not so improbable account in analysis. that two individualswith identical geThose anthropologists who attriberr of netic determinants only a limitedset ute to me the thesis that racial composican be found.Second, tion adequately reflectsthe frequencies of racial features to construct individual typological of primarycomponentsfromwhich a an that can be used in comparing given actual population originated. I system populations,I need only twogeneralas- agree fully with Givens that nature sumptions:a) thatthe degreeof pheno- does not come in neat packages; therescheme of the typical variation of a population is fore,in the classificatory proportional to its genotypicalvaria- ComparativeMorphologicalSchool the into fractions, tion; and b) thatthe degreeof relation- types are differentiated ship between populations is propor- facies, aberrations,and so on, to detional to the degree of similarity scribe variation and transitions within between their phenotypicalvariations. them. But, consideringthe interesting of Of course,the usefulness the second implications cybernetics the teleoof in assumptiondepends to a great extent logical problemsof livingmatter, am I on the influences factorsother than not able to agree completelywith the of especiallythose of natu- presenttendency populationismthat hybridization, of ral selectionor genetic drift.But, this depicts nature as a simple random problem will be considered briefly process! 4. The application of single characbelow. Returningto the questionof individ- teristicsversus their whole complexes I ual genticdifferences,mustemphasize is anotherproblem.I have triedto give firmly thatI have neverbelieved in the my view in my commenton Bielicki's existence of so-called "pure races" in article. I welcome here the simple but 39

critics. In connection with that and the prob-

the strictest sense of this term.This is fullyreflectedin my proposed definition of racial type to which I refermy

ther: "We will not go into the matter here,otherthan to point out thatmany undesirable traitsare multigenic,and the results of selection against multiare genic traits quite complexand slow" (Neel and Schull 1958: 340). At any rate, I wish by no means to reject the application of simple genetic traitsin the studyof population relationships and their history,nor do I denythe operationof naturalselection, both positive and negative, on even for large setsof features, example those I whichdescribeour racial types. would like simply to stress, together with and Oschinsky Hooton, thatsuchsimple features can not be regarded as the sole basis forracial taxonomysince we in observegreatersimilarities theirfrequencies betweenapparentlyunrelated populations. would read Also, if some of mycritics my article carefullythey could easily findthe concreteexample of the action of natural selectionon the racial types in distinguished Poland. I maymention once morethepaper ofT. W. Michalski (1957) dealing with sample of tubercu40

single-gene inheritance . . ." and fur-

reasoning inicludedin Oschinfruitful ski's comment.It is clear enough that even consideringthe average types of and thepopulation,differences similariare ties in single characteristics meaningless, when dolichocephalic may as Egyptian, well be Eskimoas Predynastic when leptoprosopic may as well be NorthernChinese as Norwegian,when may indicate Nilotic high-staturedness Negro as well as Ona. From thissimple though often neglected reason, a taxonomy of any subgroup of the human species should be based on sets of features regardlessof the type of their The excellentregenetic transmission. sults of Hiernaux's Africanstudies,to which he refersin his comment,may since he utilisizes prove thisstatement, D2 method for simultaneouscompariof son of the average-types investigated populations. I share with Bielicki, Coon and Oschinskythe view that multifactorial features more valuable in historical are ones, owing studiesthan monofactorial to the sloweraction of naturalselection I and genetic drifton the first. do not evidence forthe opsee any theoretical posite conclusionadvanced by theother especiallywhen theyaccommentators, cept the principle of the independent sortingof genes, unless we reject the handbook literaturein genetics.As an example of the action of negativeselection I may quote the thesiswhich comprises a popular handbook in human heredity:"When a traitdepends upon the interactionof two genes the effectiveness negativeselectionis, in genof eral, decreased by comparison with

lar people, and anotherone published by S. Goidziewski(1958) who has done preliminary work on a sample of cancerous people. In the firststudy,the authorobtainedresults whichshowthat of tuberculosis the lungs tendsto eliminate in Poland thoseindividuals showing Mediterranean and Armenoid ini.e. the typesof undoubtedly fluences, Southernorigin.At the same time,we have a logical explanation of the decreasing frequenciesof the Mediterranean componentin Poland which was numerous even in early mediaeval series.I mayadd here too thatour types mustenjoy some biologicalrealitysince theybehave so logicallyin relation to the known historyof the populations studied as well as to such undoubted forcesas negativenatural evolutionary selection! 5. Going more deeplyinto thisproblem,and touchingslightly upon the difthe in ficulties understanding formation of race in man, I want to mentionagain (see my commenton Bielicki's article) of theveryinteresting results E. B. Ford (1960) who concludesplainly thatnatural selectionmayoperate in such a way as to link genes. Of course, it seems ratherprematureto judge my concept of the racial element as genetically formed a seriesof linked genes,and by I have neverregardedit as more than a which Bielicki forworkinghypothesis, getsin his comment. none of mycritics raised has Actually, any concreteobjections to the linkage hypothesis. least, the resultsof the At statistical elaborations of A. Wanke, H. and Z. Szczotka,J. Dgbowy or W. Kocka, demonstrating discrete nonrandom distributionof sets of classic racial features,do not contradictthis As hypothesis. regards Waliszko'spaper, I referto my remarkincluded in my commenton Bielicki's article. The possiblesolutionto thatproblem may come only from furthergenetic studies of families,but not fromgeneral, even veryimpressive speculations. 6. Finally, there remain some more detailed questionsincluded in the comments. At first, can not agree with Garn's I statement that typesmay be infinite in numberand thattheirnumberdepends on thevirtuosity the typologist. of Present anthropological practice all over the world shows that the number of principal typesdistinguished differby ent individual typologists varies only from 16 to several more, being always considerably fewer than the populations.Even if a typeis conceivedto be a purelymechanicalcombinationof a set of features(thereis no such concept in the lexicon of the Comparative Morphological School) the numberof combinationswill be quite definite when a

is definitenumber of characters taken into account according to the wellknownmathematical equation. Boyd marginallytouches upon the problemof the taxonomicvalue of data on the living body as opposed to data on the bones alone. One could argue thatsoftpartsare better indicators than osteous materials,since a) the individual variationof measurabletraits the of soft parts is usually greater than the variation of measurable traits of the bones; and b) the softparts are much more subject to the influenceof the external environment than are the bones (especially the skull) and thus theyreveal to a greaterextentindividual inheritable Neverthemodifications. less, every anthropologist concerned withethnogenetical studiesis forcedto deal much more with osteousmaterials the thanwithanyotherkind; therefore, taxonomy uses should also be based, he at first, craniologicaltraits. on Bielicki sharplyobjects to assigning any real significance the boundary to lines delimiting the morphological typesobtained by the use of individual diagnostics. some extent,I feel less To in optimistic thisrespect,that is, I too mustregardthemas being rathermere conventions, until the proper concrete genetical analysis of family data is made. But it would be difficult agree to with Bielicki's objections concerning the method of delimitingtypesin the ComparativeMorphologicalSchool. No one who knows the procedure of differential diagnostics in zootaxonomy in would see pure artificiality received taxonomic units. Here, I must emphatically welcome Coon's suggestions on the application of the principlesof zootaxonomy to human racial types. it Furthermore, mightbe added in reply to Bielicki's comment that the racial types distinguished by Michalski's School are surely muchmoregenetically compact than any known actual populations, which are apparently more heterogenousowing to a considerably greaterphenotypicalvariation.I think a good taxonomyshould operate with units as compactas possible; therefore, I preferour typesthan even such undoubtedly natural subgroupings as Bielicki and otherswho say of a tyhis pologist that he classifies typeshaving in mind some pre-knowledge about them are, to some extent,right. But, Bielicki wants to present the types as though they had been born like Nike fromthe head of Zeus. In reality,the individual typologistsimply does not reject typologicalknowledge resulting even fromthe freeimpressions older of students(whichare sometimes more interesting than some mostmodernracial studies) or from applications of carCURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

panmictic populations.

tographic methods. Moreover, he is obliged to referto them as theyoccur in everyhonest taxonomy, and then to refine previously known characteristics, or to add new ones, if necessitatedby differential diagnostics. On the question of the applicability of Wanke's reference points method,I agree completelywith the severe criticism expressed in almost all the comments, and at the same time, I refer the commentators the more detailed to on considerations thatpoint which are included in my commenton Bielicki's article. Since the most concrete arguments which appear in the whole discussion are the citedpapers of Hunt (1959) and Hiernaux (1956), 1 should like to have them at my disposal. Only then would I be able to analyze the strength of the argumentof both these papers, especiallyif theycontain the individual data. Summingup my replyI must thank all the commentators theirvaluable for remarks whichhave forcedme to make myraciologicalviewsmuchclearer,and which,perhaps, influencedthem more than theirauthorswould expect. I hope that furtherextensive and concrete studies and discussions will bring near both concepts of race to a degreeofsophistication sufficient conto struct one largersynthetic approach.

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY

OF RACE

ReplyBy TADEUSZ BIELICKI

(Continued frompage 38)

(multifactorial) characterstend to be relativelymore resistantto the directional operation of natural selection than monogenic ones (and hence can, in manyinstances, serveas bettermarkers of historicalrelationshipsbetween populations), has drawn varyingcomments. Several commentators reject it as completely false. But Lasker says thatit is "an important question forinvestigation both by theoretical and empirical methods."And in Coon's opinion the emphasis on the usefulnessof polygenic traits in racial analysis is "sound." FromthisI inferthattheissue is apparently a source of some confusion.It is therefore great pity that a none of the commentators(most of whom are personscertainly much more competentthan I in the fieldof genetics), has taken the trouble to discuss and clarifythis interesting problem in a moredetailedmanner. Unless I am very grosslymistaken, thereare reasons to expect, on purely theoretical grounds,that the frequency of a selectivelydisadvantageouspolygenically transmittedphenotype will decrease more slowly in a population Vol. 3 -No. 1 -February1962

than the frequency of a phenotype which is equally disadvantageous (in but contermsof reproductivefitness) trolled by a single locus. This follows fromthe fact that segregationand recombinationproduce a lower percentage of individuals homozygous for many loci than those homozygousfor a single locus. Consequently,in polygenic inheritancethe extremephenoout more rarely,which type segregates meansthata smallerportionof thepopulation is exposed to the full impactof selection than in the case of single factor inheritance. Stern (1960: 658661) discusses some simple examples of such as the efficiency completeselection againsta single factorhomozygote and and against a double homozygote concludes that "the speed with which speaccomplishes selectionpermanently cific results decreases with increasing numberof loci." Anothergeneticmechanism which tends to reduce the efficiencyof selectionupon polygenictraits is provided by linkage. As Sheppard (1960: 105-114) points out, polygenes a affecting particularcharactertend to i.e. formbalanced systems, to be linked in such a way thatin each chromosome involvedthereoccursa combinationof allelomorphs which produces the optimum phenotypic expression of the trait in the given environment.Conchanges sequently,if the environment and the expression of the trait is no longer at its optimum,there is in the population no immediatelyavailable on inheritedvariability whichselection could operate, and evolution is impossible as long as such variabilityis not whichis likely releasedby crossing-over, to take some time. Linkage between polygenes controlling differenttraits since any change in has similareffects, a given charactercontrolledby a balis anced polygenicsystem bound to disthus rupt some otherbalanced systems, their to causingothertraits departfrom optimum value; such a change will thereforebe counteractedby natural selection until all allelomorphs inand new themselves volved redistribute are balanced systems builtup. Sheppard of summarizes the effects such a situa-

to individually the changing themselves by environment producingnon-herediin modifications theirbodies,selectary tion will not be invoked (or will be veryslow) forsome time,until the environmentchanges so drasticallythat this mode of adaption becomes no Thus plasticityof a longer sufficient. against the traitis an additional buffer action of natural selection. (I admit, however,that this argumentis irrelesince in vant forthe presentdiscussion, situationtherewill, theabove-described of course, be a change in the modal phenotype of the population, despite absence of selection.) the temporary 3. Boyd agreesthatthereis at present "not the faintestscrap of direct evidence" for the operation of selection or as upon such human traits hair form facial length;" yet he seems quite sure that such evidence will be found. To this I can reply by quoting another words:"We are not justified geneticist's of adaptivesignificance any in assuming traitswithout evidence. The problem just can not be settledby dogmaticprono of nouncements any authority, matter how eminent.
. .

of not know the adaptive significance and it is just mosthuman genetictraits, as wrongto assume thatall of themare adaptively neutral as to believe that or mustbe eitherdeleterious harmthey ful" (Dobzhansky1951: 313). certain Besides,the questionwhether morphological characters, e.g. facial are lengthor hair form, or are not subject to selection pressures,is, for the purpose of the presentdiscussion,not the most relevantone. The real question is, if selectiondoes act upon these is characters, its action a) directional, and b) intense enough to produce noin ticeable shifts the modal expressions of these charactersin a given populasay,20 or 30 generations? tion after, remindsus that 4. Hiernaux rightly effectsanalogous to random genetic drift maybe producedby the departure of a smallpart of a population to a new may habitat,and thatthiskind of drift affect both polywithequal probability genic and monogenictraits.Obviously, group whichcontributed if the migrant to the formationof a mixtureconstition as follows: ". . . Integrated polysample of the anresultin an 'inertia'which tuted a non-random genicsystems has to be overcomeby large and pro- cestral population, then the composilonged environmentalchange before tion of such a mixture can not be evaluated by any method,unthere will be any evolutionarychange correctly in the population. Despite the factthat less we can learn in which traitand to group deviated selection is often intense,evolution is whatextentthemigrant fromits ancestralstock. usually very slow. . ." (1960: 111). Still the 5. Mourant'sexampleconcerning another factor which tends to slow exhibited South AfricanBushmenand the Onges down selection is plasticity, by polygenictraitsmore often than by of theAndaman Islands seemsto me illmonogenicones. It is clear thatif mem- chosen.The factthatboth thesegroups bers of a population are able to adapt show similarityin morphological fea41

. We simply do

tures can suggest either evolutionary convergence due to prolongedselection or commonorigin.The first interpretation would sound rather dubious in view of the fact that the environments in which these two peoples live and have probably lived for quite a long time differ markedly manyrespects; in a barren desertand a forested oceanic archipelago are certainlynot the best example of environmentalsimilarity. On the otherhand, if one assumesthat the Bushmen and the Onges are morphologically alike because of common ancestrydating back to some very remote past, then this would only prove what Mourant, by resorting this exto ample,is trying put in doubt; namely to thatin morphological featurestracesof inter-populationrelationship can be preservedin a recognizableformfor a relatively very long period of time, while blood group frequencies undergo veryconsiderablechanges.In myopinion the whole example does not by any means indicate thatpolygenictraitsare in this case a less reliable source of informationon ethnic historythan are blood typefrequencies; thecontrary, on it rathercould suggestthat the reverse is true. I admit that I am more impressedby what Hiernaux writesabout theobserved in shifts morphology the of Bantu tribes which recentlymigrated into the equatorial forest the Eastern of Congo. These findings seem to indido cate a situation in which directional has selection actedmoreefficiently upon polygenicsystems than on blood types. I think, however, thata situationof this sort is to be consideredrather an exceptionto than an illustration a genof eral rule. 6. One mustagreewithMourantthat the probabilityof a picture of intergroup relationshipbeing distortedby the effectof a random genetic drift tends to decrease with the increasing numberof single-gene systems used for the comparison.I also agree, and most with Mourant's opinenthusiastically, ion thatthereexistsa pressing need for a "renewed, well-coordinated attack,on a large scale" on the geneticsof human metricalcharacters individual famiin lies. I do not thinkthatenoughresearch is effort beinginvestedat presentin this field. very important 7. It is very true that, as Garn remarks,by the adroit selection of measurements "Warsaw Poles and Detroit Poles could prove to be poles apart" and thatany "index of likenessdepends upon the criteria fed into it." I am afraid it is not possible to circumvent this difficulty. method of comparAny ing objects, no matterhow ingenious and formally correct,can only be applied afterone decides on which variables the comparison to be based,and is 42

such a decision is bound to be subjec8. In reply to Oschinsky'sremark, difference any inter-population which has a genetic nature is a racial difference, even if it involves only a single trait. From this it obviously does not followthatlack of such difference a in single traitis evidence forrelationship. It is only when populations do not differ exhibit small differences) (or in a greater numberor setof traits thathistorical relationshipcan be postulated. 9. It was a great pleasure for me to read Garn's opinion about the studies on differential survivorship relation in to head form,recentlycarried out in Poland. The historicallydocumented trendtowardround-headedness sugdid gest that directional selection may be involved in this case. Garn, however, remarksthat selection is not always a one-sided process, and that in many morphologicaltraitsthe possibilityof differential loss at the phenotypicextremesshould also be noted. This, I think, an excellentpoint. Mr. Z. Weis lon and I have recentlyre-examined the data by extending the analysis of survivorship the medium classes of on head form, which had previouslybeen omittedfromour analysis.The results exceeded our expectations and they fully confirm Garn's prediction. turns It out that in the studied population, farmers from Nowogrodzkie the district, mesocephalic individuals have on the average significantly more living siblings than both the extreme dolichocephals and extreme brachycephals. The mean size of sibship achieves a maximumin the 80.5-83.5 class of the cephalic index and it gradually decreases toward both ends of the scale, though this decrease is more pronounced (thecurveis moresteep) in the left, i.e. dolichocephalic, part of the scale. The totalmaterialon whichthese findings based comprises are more than 6,200 sibships,and seems large enough to draw statistically valid conclusions. I also had the opportunity estimate, to on the basis of other pre-war Polish material,the between-sib correlation in head form;the coefficient obtained was
tive.

is d, identicalwiththatused in analytiThe real question, then, cal geometry. D2 is which of the two statistics, or d, on fullerinformation over-all furnishes divergence between two populations? The limitationof d is that it takes no account of correlationbetween traits. But the D2, too, has its limitations, which Hiernaux does not mention. First, the computations involved are more laboriousand timeincomparably (This maysound like a very consuming. in trivial argumentto anthropologists America and WesternEurope; it does not to all those who do not have good computingmachinesat theirdisposal.) Secondly,the methodmakessense only when variances and correlations are similar in all populations compared. Now, if thisconditionis met,therecan be no doubt that D2 is a more accurate measure of biological distance than d, unless the comparisonis based on traits betweenwhichthereis no, or almostno in correlation, whichcase D2 and d' become identical! But the resultsof a Da whereas analysisis a matrixof distances, theresultsof Wanke's methodis a population composition. Of course, D2 can values, as measures of difference, easily be converted into similarities. unless one insiststhat there Therefore, is no sense in computingsuch compositions,an opinion withwhichI disagree, I can see no reason why the D2 values could not be inserted into Wanke's equations insteadof the simple d's. For I thesake of illustration, have done this using Pollitzer's(1958) data on American Negroes.Here are the two compositionsobtained:
White Component West African Component

U.S. Negroes

43

57 78

CharlestonNegroes 22

I confess that I feel less optimistic about the reliabilityof the component frequencyanalysis as applied to situationswherethe numberand the characof teristics the parentalpopulationsare points not known,and whereficticious of reference(polar types) must be resortedto. 11. Hiernaux points out that even if r = .45. 10. The D2 method of Mahalanobis the ancestralgroupswho are known to is mentionedby several commentators have formeda given mixtureare still the as superior to a component-frequency available forstudy, presentfrequenanalysis, and Hiernaux discusses this cies or means of their traitscannot be used to calculate the composition issuein somedetail.I thinkthatthetwo safely unlessit is assumedthat methods are not immediatelycompa- of the mixture, both in the ancestralgroups rable. The D2 statistics a measure of thesetraits is have remained itself biological distance between popula- and in themixture of stable since the formation tions;it is not a techniqueof evaluating relatively to population composition. In Wanke's the latter;and it is oftenrisky assume have. This is undoubtactually method biological distance is also em- thatthey edly true. One should only add that ployed but onlyas an intermediate step leading to the evaluation of the com- exactly the same hazards are involved based on single-gene in reconstructions position. The distance used by Wanke
C URREN T ANTHROPOLOGY

traits.And the answerto this can only be thatin any particularcase it is up to the investigator tryto minimizethe to sourceof such errors. This can be done by looking up and employing traits which in the given environmentand for the given period of history can, for some reason or other, be regarded as stable.It may be truethat,as relatively this the Hiernaux asserts, restricts applicationof themethodto a fewcasesonly. Still, if in these few cases the method can help the racial historian,it would be certainly worthwhile to apply it. Three more comments V. Bunak, (by reached I. Michalski, and A. WierciAski) me verylate, afterthe above Reply had already been writtenand sent to the conEditorof C.A. They are, therefore, sideredseparately. On the Commentof Bunak. in 1. Two equal mean differences a givenset of characters mayindeed have "different morphologicalmeanings."If I am not mistaken, thisambiguity to is desome extentinherentin all hitherto vised indices of over-allintergroupdivergence, excludingthemostsophisnot ticated of them-the D2 statisticsof Mahalanobis. Yet such indices have theirvalue: it has long been recognized by anthropologists(and not only by them)thatforcertainpurposesit is very if convenientand informative, not indispensable,to have the degreeof intergrouprelationship expressed a single by number.The pricepaid forthisconvenconience is loss of certaininformation; veniencescan seldombe obtainedgratis. On the other hand, the advantage offered by such summaryindices (and, in fact,the purpose forwhich theyare is being constructed) that theypermit of quantitativecomparisons objects,or groupsof objects,withregardto a comtakenas a whole.Needless plex of traits to say, comparisonsof particulartraits are mostessential, and much can be inlike ferredfromgraphic presentations that proposed by Mollison. But each trait considered separatelymay tell a and somewhat different story, significant new information may often be gained by combiningall such storiesinto one synthetic picture. 2. Bunak, attackingcertain assumptionsunderlying WierciAski's proposals, quite unjustifiably attributesthese assumptionsto me as well. E.g., I did not assumethat "thereis a definite number of races." There would be, if mankind consistedof isolateswithno interbreeding betweenthem.Since this condition is obviouslyfarfrom being fulfilled, the actual picture is that of considerable overlapping,and sometimesof virtual continuity; am as aware of thisstateof I affairs Bunak is. It is true, that an as anthropologist who analyzes a populaVol. 3 *No. 1 February1962

Discussion:

ISSUES IN THE STUDY

OF RACE

individualshas to believe tionby typing that the numberof "pure races" is definite and fixed-both in the material studied and in mankind as a whole; otherwise would not be able to begin he his typing all. But I cannot see what at makes Bunak thinkthat the proposals set forth in my article necessitate a do similarassumption. What they necessitate is a considerationof how many different races (populations) have entereda givenmixture. But thisis a question which can oftenbe reasonablyanway; it has nothing sweredin a definite in common with barren deliberations on the exact number of races of manmy kind. Similarly, assertionthat traits which can be regardedas having been relativelystable in the groups studied are especially useful for ethnic reconstruction, has absolutely nothing in fallacious common with the flagrantly which Bunak attributes generalization, to me, that "complexes of characteristics"(typicalforparticular races) "have remainedunchangedsincetheperiod of Finally,while it is true race formation." that "both authors"(i.e., both WierciAski and myself)spoke of populations as "formedby the mixtureof certainelements,"it is, I hope, evidentthatI was using the conceptof an "element"with a distinctly meaning. different 3. Bunak makes an excellent point when he remarksthat Deniker's cartographicalmethodand the procedureof individual racial diagnosis rest on entheoretical foundations. tirelydifferent Deniker's method was essentially a "multiple cline" analysis; what it was meantto sortout weretype-populations rather than types referredto by proponents of "individual taxonomy." that So4. I consider it noteworthy viet physical anthropologists,despite of their bittercriticism Mendelian gehave developed a conceptof race netics, fromthatformulated not verydifferent by the genetic anthropologyin the the West.Bunak's statement concerning sounds unnature of racial differences that"a complexof equivocal. He writes traitsacquires the meaning of a racial characteristic only if it is closelylinked If to a definiteterritory. thiscondition is not realized and the complex studied then it cannot be is extra-territorial" "a regardedas characterizing taxonomic Since each breedingpopulacategory." tion is obviouslya group of individuals inhabitinga common,moreor less defiit nite territory, seems that the above statement closely corresponds to the thesis so emphaticallyexpounded by modern systematics, that speaking of taxonomic (hence racial) differences to makes sense only in reference those situationswhere breedingpopulations,

ratherthangroupsdefinedin any other fromone anotherin genetiway,differ I traits. do not have to callydetermined add thatI fullysubscribeto thisline of I Therefore, am also in agreethinking. ment with Bunak's concludingremark that "the so called 'elementaryracial types,'" conceived of in termsof inare dividual typology, "extra-territorial variants"and hence "do not characterof ize the racial history the population studied." of On the comments 1. Michalski and A. Wiercifiski. whythe 1. I am unable to understand of emphasison theusefulness polygenic characters for ethnic reconstruction claims, logically should, as Wiercifiski lead to an acceptance of individual tywhatpology.I see no logicalconnection soeverbetweenthesetwoviews. 2. The factthatthespeed withwhich 2 over randomizes linked traits crossing in a panmicticpopulation varies as an of function thedistancebetween inverse loci on the chromosome, the respective belief in no way validates WierciAski's that there existsclose linkage between all the fiveor more traitstraditionally regarded as typologicallydiagnostic. Empirical evidence in favorof this belief is lacking. 3. Whatevermightbe said about the mathematicalside of Waliszko's analysis, the fact remains that those of the typologicaltraitswhich show no Pearsonian correlationbetween themselves association failto exhibitanysignificant within populations. This is admitted even by typologists Kocka 1958). H. (cf. and Z. Szczotkaobtained surplusesbecorrelated dealt withstrongly cause they such as facial and nasal incharacters dex, and eye and hair color. 4. I am unable to commenton the footnotewrittenjointly by Wiercifiski and mathematicianL. Szczerba, since the concludingpart of theirreasoning (fromequation 4 onwards) is not clear to me. Where do the authors obtain the "actual" composition with which Wanke's compositionis said to be discordant? 5. Clearly,if one assumesin advance that a population contains more than L the twocomponents and E, and ifone introducesall of them into the calculations,one has no rightto expect that Wanke's method will yield a 50% L50% E composition.It is an easy, but not veryimpressivetrickto employ a illogical manmethodin a deliberately ner and then to point out thatit yields illogical results. 6. I cannot see what makes WierciAski think that the method in question operates only with certain specific 43

metrictraits(he probablyhas in mind the classic4 or 5 craniologicalindices). In fact any continuous trait may be used. 7. I am not at all surprised thatWiercifiski able to producehistorical is argumentsin order to justifythe discovery of the "Berberictype"in the Neolithic population of Poland. The deceptiveness of typologicalthinking exactly lies in the fact that typology capable of is furnishing "evidence" for literallyany "ethnogenetictheory"one might ever thinkup. The reasons for this are obof vious. The diversity human phenotypesis so enormousthatin practically everypopulation it is possible to find some individualswhom,on the basis of one or a fewtraits, one can diagnose as "akin" to sometypecommonin another ethnic group, no matter how remote, historicalconand thus "demonstrate" nections. Of course, the typologistis usuallyprudentenoughto discover only such admixtureswhich cannot be rejected outrighton historicaland geographicgrounds.As long as he observes thisrule, he remainssafe,and his conclusions are well shielded against any

attack. This is why he can defend,by resortingto historical arguments,discoveriesof the "Berberic type" in Poland, in India, in the Congo-in fact of everywhere, wherever possibility the some NorthAfricaninfluence (however indirect)can not be ruled out. In reality, these findingstell nothing: they have prove neitherthatsuchmigrations taken place, nor that theyhave not. I am positivethatit would not be impossible forMichalskior Wiercitiski find to among native Poles some individuals with, say, an "Australoid admixture": men with broad noses, depressednasal roots, heavy brow ridges, long heads, and wavy hair. The fact that these individuals would have a light skin and perhaps blue or greenish eyes, would not bother the typologistat all: he could simply postulatethat"in Cromagnonoid-Australoid hybrids light pigmentation is dominant"-and this would settle the problem. (This is not a joke; in typological literaturesuch assumptions concerning dominanceand recessiveness particulartraitsin variof ous "hybrids"are made at everystepcf.Wiercitiski 1958) . ThereforeI assert

has so far that if in fact no typologist reported traces of Australoids in Poland, thishas been so onlybecause such findings would be too blatantlyincompatible withhistory geography, and and not because the necessary"evidence" could not be producedby means of "individual racial diagnosis." The opinion thatCA treatment an is extremely stimulating and usefulpolicy of this journal has already been expressedby numerousassociates.I fully subscribeto this view, and I have special reasons for doing so. To a scholar who usually writesand publishes in a language little understoodoutside his own country, therecan be nothing more beneficial than an opportunityto expose his viewsand ideas to the criticism of a "world auditorium,"particularly when,as it is in thiscase, such criticism is being essayed by authoritieswhose opinions carrygreatweightand whose professionalexperience most certainly exceeds that of the author. I am sinto cerelygrateful all scholarswho took the trouble to write commentson my article.

References Cited
E. BANSE, 1923. Lexicon der Geographie 2 Band. Braunschweig u. Hamburg. [IM*] A. BATRAWI, 1950. The racial history of Egypt and Nubia. Journal of the Royal AnthropologicalInstitute 80:131-56. BEAN, R. B. 1911. Heredity of hair form among the Filipinos. American Naturalist 45:524-36. BIELICKI, T. 1958. O?rodki powstate po drugiej wojnie swiatowej. Materia;y i prace antropologiczne(Wroclaw) 40. [IM*] BIELICKI, T., and Z. WELON. 1961. Dzialanie mechanizm6w selekcyjnych na ksztalt glowy.Materia;y i Prace Antropologiczne (in press). BIRDsELL, J. B. 1949. The problem of the early peopling of the Americas as viewed fromAsia. In Papers on the Physical Anthropology the AmericanIndian. New of York: The Viking Fund. --. 1950. Some implications of the genetical concept of race in termsof spatial analysis. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 15:259-314. --. 1952. On various levels of objectivity in genetical anthropology. American Journal of Physical Anthropology,n.s. 10:355-62. BOAS, FRANZ, 1910. Changes in bodily form of descendants of immigrants. Senate document 209 (61st Congress, 2nd Session), Washington,D.C. [GWI*] --. (Ed.) 1938. General anthropology. New York: D. C. Heath. BOYD,W. C. 1950. Geneticsand the races of man. Boston: Little,Brown & Co. lation fertilitylevels to ethnic group backgrounds. Eugenics Quarterly8:12-22. [EEH*] BRIGGS,L. C. 1955. The stone age races of northwest Africa. American School of PrehistoricResearch, Peabody Museum, Harvard University, Bulletin 18. BUNAK, V. 1932. Neues Material zur Aussonderung anthropologischer Typen Ost Europas. Zeitschrift fiur Morphologie und Anthropogie30. [VB*] --. 1936. Changes in the mean value of charactersin mixed populations. Annals of Eugenics 7:3. [VB*] --. 1960. Les types anthropoliques du peuple russe et certains problemes de l'histoire de leur formation.Communicat. de la delegation soviet. au VI-e Congres Intern. dea Sciences anthrop. et ethnol. Moscou. [VB*] CASPARI, E. 1958. "Genetic basis of behavior," in Behavior and Evolution, Edited by A. Roe and G. G. Simpson. Yale UniversityPress, 103-127. [TB*] CHANTRE, E. 1904. Recherches anthropologiques dans l'Afrique orientale Egypte. Lyon. CHEPURKOVSKII, Y., 1913. Geograficheskoe raspred'el'enie go lovnovo ukazat'elya i tzvetnosti krest'yanskovo naseleniyapreimushch estvenno Velikorossii. Izvestiya Obshchestvalyubitel'eiYest'estvoznaniya (Moskva) 124. [VB*] CHILDE,V. G. 1926. The Aryans. London: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co. CIPRIANI, L. 1932. Osservazioni antropometriche su indigeni asiatici e africani. Estrattodall'Archivio per l'Antropologia e la Etnologia 50-51 (1930-31). [IM*]
BRESLER,J. T. 1961. The relation of popuCLARK, P. J. 1952. An extension of the co-

of efficient divergencefor use with multiple characters.Copeia 2:61-64. COON, S. 1939. The races of Europe. New C. York: Macmillan. CZEKANOWSKI, 1909. Zur DifferentialdiagJ. nose der der Neandertalgruppe. Korrespondenz-Blatt der Deutschen Gesellschaftfur Anthropologie40:44-47. --. 1928. Das Typenfrequenzgesetz. Anthropologischer Anzeiger5:335-59. --. 1930a. Das Anthropologische Mittelwertgesetz. Verhandlunger der Gesellschaft fur Physische Anthropologie 4: 15-20. --. 1930b. Zarys antropologii Polski. Lwow: Jakubowski. --. 1948a. Antropologia polska w miqdzywojennymdwudziestoleciu 1919-1939. Towarzystwo Naukowe Warszawskie, Sect. IV, 1-123. --. 1948b. Polska-SlowiaAszcz yz na. Warszawa: S. Arct. --. 1948c. Zagadnienia antropologii (Zarysantropologii teoretycznel). Toruii: Szczesnyi Ska. --. 1953. Die SchweizerischeanthropologischeAufnahmeim Lichte des Populationskomponentegesetzes A. Wanke. von Bul. de l'Acaddemie Polonais de Sciences Classe II 1:1. Varsovie. [IM*] --. 1954. Die Schweizerische anthropologische Aufnahme im Lichte der polnischen Untersuchungsmethoden. Przeglad Antropologiczny 20:218-314. --. 1955. Wyniki zastosowanie pewnych metod typologizacjiw perspektywie metody ilosciowej. PrzeglkdAntropologiczny 21:915-67. (Wroclaw) rim*1
CURRENT ANTHROPOLOGY

44

Jamaica. The Scientific Monthly 27:22538. DAVENPORT,C. B., and M. STEGGERDA. 1928. Nasal breadth in Negro-White crossing. Eugenical News 13:36-37. DEBETZ, G. F. 1930. Antropologicheskiy sostav nassieleniyaPribaikalia v epockhu pozdnevo neolita. Russkiy AntropologicheskiyJurnal 19:7-50. DEBETZ, G. F., and M. W. IGNATIEV.1938. 0 nekotorikh variatsionnostatisticheskikh metodakh rasovovo analiza v burshuaznoy antropologyi. Trudi Instituta Antropol Mosskovski Gossudarstvienniy Universitet. 4:171-92. DOBZHANSKY,TH. 1951a. Discussion of J.B. Birdsell's paper "Some Implications of the genetical concept of race in termsof spatial analysis," Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology XV: 313. [TB*] ---. 1951b. Human diversity and adaptation. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on QuantitativeBiology XV. [TB*] 1953. Genetics and the Origin of --. Species. New York: Columbia University Press. [TB*] ---. 1955. Evolution, Genetics and Man. New York: Wiley. [TB*] DUNN, L. C., and TH. DOBZHANSKY. 1946. Heredity, Race, and Society. New York: Penguin Books. EICKSTEDT, E. von. 1937. Geschichte der anthropologischen Namengebung und Klassifikation. Zeitschrift fur Rassenkunde 5:209-82; 6:36-96, 151-211. FAWCETr, C. D. 1901. A second studyof the variation and correlationof the human skull with special reference to the Naqada crania. Biometrika 1:408-67. FISCHER, E. 1913. Die Rehobother Bastards und das Bastardierungsproblem.Jena: G. Fischer. Foiu, E. B. 1960. "Evolution in Progress," in Evolution afterDarwin 1:181-96. [AW*] FRETS, P. 1921. Heredity and headform G. in man. The Hague: M. Nijhoff GARN, S. M. 1957. Race and evolution. American Anthropologist 59:218-24. [TB*] 1961. Human Races. Springfield, Illinois: C. C. Thomas. [GWL*] GARN, M., and C. S. COON.1954."Climate S. and the Race," in Climatic change: Evidence causes and effects. Edited by H. Shapley. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. [AW*] 1955. On the number of races of mankind. American Anthropologist57: 996-1001. R. GATES, R. 1946. Human Genetics. New York: Macmillan. --. 1954. A new theory skin colour inof heritance. Acts of the Fourth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences, Vienna. GEPPERT, H. and S. KOLLER. 1938. Erbmathematik.Leipzig: Quelle & Meyer. [AW*] GOZDZIEWSKI, S. 1958. Analiza antropologiczna chorych raka. Materialy i prace na antropologiczne,Wroclaw, 5: 1-50. [AW*r] GU)NTHER, H. F. K. 1937. Kleine Rassenkunde des deutschen Volkes. Munich: J.F. Lehmann.

DAVENPORT, C. B. 1928. Race crossing in

Discussion: HADDON, A. C. 1924. The races of man and

ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF RACE

their distribution.London: Macmillan. HENZEL, T. 1934. Pigmeje centralnoafrykanscy. Archiwum Lwowskiego TowarzystwaNaukowego 6:229-302. 1950. Z badan nad strukturaantropologisczn4 ludnosci AfrykiSrodkowej. Lodzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe, Sprawozdanie z czynosci posiedzeii za drugie i potrocze 1948r,Rok III nr 2 /6/L6d'. [IM*] HENZEL, T., and I. MICHALSKI. 1955. Podstavy klasyfikacji czlowieka w ujqciu Tadeusza Henzla i Ireneusza Michal21:537skiego. Przeglqd antropologiczny 662. HIERNAUX,J. 1956. Analyse de la variation des caracteresphysiqueshumains en une region de I'Afrique centrale: Ruan-daUrundi et Kivu. Ann. Musee Roy. Congo Belge, Tervuren, Sc, de l'Homme, Anthropologie,vol. 3, 131 p. [JH*] E. HOOTON, A. 1939. Crimeand the man. Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press. ---. 1946. Up from the ape. 2nd edition. New York: Macmillan. HUNT, EDWARD E., JR. 1959a. AnthropoAmermetry, geneticsand racial history. 61:64-87. ican Anthropologist 1959b. The continuing evolution of modern man. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on QuantitativeBiology 24:245-54. ---. 1961. Malocclusion and civilization. American Journal of Orthodontics 47: [EEH*] 406-22. HURST, C. C. 1908.On the inheritance of eye colour in man. Proceedings of the Royal Society80:85-96. KAPICA, Z. 1958. Szkice z antropologii historycznej Polski i ziem osciennych. Lddzkie TowarzystwoNaukowe. Sec. 3, 52:1-196. KEITH, A. 1948. The factors of evolution. London. KLUCKHOHN, C. 1949. Mirrorfor man. New York: WhittleseyHouse. KocKA, W. 1958. Zagadnienia etnogenezy lud6w Europy. Materialy i prace antropologiczne, Wroclaw 22:1-296. [AW*] LEICHER, H. 1929. tber die Vererbung der Nasenform. Verhandlungen der Gesellschaftfur PhysischeAnthropologie3:2333. Li, C. C. 1955. Population Genetics. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press. LUNDMAN, B. 1952. Umriss der Rassenkunde des Menschen in Geschichtlicher Zeit. Copenhagen: E. Munksgaard. MALES, B. 1950-51. La biodinamica y la cion. Revista del Instituto de Antropologia de la UniversidadNacional de Tucuman. 5-6:7-20. 1927. MALISZEWSKI, E., and B. OLSZEWICZ. 2. PodrqcznySlownik Geograficzny Warszawa. [IM*] biogenesis racial en el studio de la pobla[EEH, GWL*]

MeyersLexicon. 1927-28. Siebente Auflage, 7-8nB. Leipzig. [IM*] MICHALSKI, I. 1938. Skladniki rasowe Chinczykow. Prace antropologiczneInstytutu Nauk antropologicznych etnologicznych i Towarzystwa Naukowego W 3:1-73.

---. 1949. StrukturaantropologicznaPolski. Acta Anthropolologica Universitatis Lodziensis,part I. 7:1-236. --. 1957. Charakterystykaantropologiczna ludno?ciz dorzecza Kwilu. Lodzkie Naukowe. Sec. 3, 49:1-107. Towarzystwo MICHALSKI, T. W. 1956. Studia nad struktura antropologiczn=kraj6w alpejskich. Acta Anthropologica UniversitatisLodziensis 2:1-60. MICHALSKI, T. W., Z. TORZECKI, and A. WENDT. 1957. Somatologia gruzlicy.Acta Anthropologica UniversitatisLodziensis 3:1-168. MISZKIEWIcz, B. 1960a. StrukturaantropolLudnosci autochtonicznej ogiczna warmii. Materialy i Prace Antropologiczne 51:1-115. 1960b. Personal communication. ---. MONTAGU,M. F. A. 1945. Man's most dangerous myth: the fallacy of race. New York: Columbia Univ. Press. ---. 1950. A considerationof the concept of race. Cold SpringHarbor Symposiaon Quantitative Biology 15:315-36. MORANT, G. 1925. A study of Egyptian craniology from prehistoric to Roman times.Biometrika 17:1-52. MYDLARSKI, J. 1939. Rasa. Czfowiek,Jego Rasy i Zycie 1:19-116. NEEL, Y. V. and W. Y. SCHULL. 1958. Human Heredity. The Universityof Chi[AW*] cago Press, Chicago. NEWMAN, M. T. 1953. The application of the ecological rules to the racial anthropology of the aboriginal New World. 55:311-27. American Anthropologist UH*] NN. 1955. Konferencja antropologiczna w Przesprawie badan etnogenetycznych. 21:28-181. glad antropologiczny of OSCHINSKY, L. 1954. The racial affinities the Baganda and other Bantu tribes of British East Africa. Cambridge: W. Heffer. 1959. A reappraisal of recent serological, genetic and morphological research on the taxonomy of the races of Africa and Asia. Anthropologica,n.s. 1. PASZKOWSKI,S., and M. WARMUS. 1956. 0 w pewnej metodziematematycznej antro(Wropologii. Przeglqd Antropologiczny [IM*] claw) 22:627-50. PEARSON, K. 1905. Note on Dr. Keith's review of Professor Arthur Thomson's "The ancient races of the Thebaid." Man 5:116-19. PERKAL, J. 1955. 0 pewnychideach Czekanowskiegoi o metodzie Wankego. Prze21:378-95. glad Antropologiczny POLLITZER, W. S. 1958. The Negroes of Charleston; a studyof hemoglobin types, serology, and morphology. American Journal of Physical Anthropology16:2, [TB*] 241-265. Popov, M., 1959. Antropologiyana B'lgarskiya. narod. Sofia: Akademiya na nau[VB*] kitye. RODENWALDT, E. 1927. Die Mestizen auf Kisar. Batavia.
ROSIr*SKI, B. 1947. 0 dziedziczeniu barwy

--.1939. CharakterystykaantropologicznaSikhow. Przeglqbd antropologiczny

13:50-70.

giczny 14:32-45. 0 dziedziczeniu barwy --.1947-48. Wlos65wu czlowieka. Sprawodzania Towarzystwa Naukowego W, Section IV, 41:43-71.

oczu u czlowieka. Przeglqbd antropolo-

Vol. 3 *No. 1 -February1962

45

SCHEIDT, W. 1925. Allgemeine Rassenkunde

als Einfiuhrung in das Studium der Menschenrassen. Munich: J. F. Lehmann. heredity. Harper and Brothers, New York.

SHEPPARD,P. M. 1960.Natural selectionand

SIMPSON, GEORGE GAYLORD. 1945. The prin-

ciples of classification and a classification of mammals. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 85. [LO*]

--. 1961.Principles of animal taxonomy. New York: Columbia University Press. [TD*]
9KERLJ,

B. 1935. Rasni tipy Slovencev. Evgenika 1.

SMITH,S. S. 1810. An essay on the causes of the varietyof complexion and figurein the human species. New Brunswick (N.J.): J. Simpson & Co.
STERN, C. 1960. Principles of human genet-

ics. W. H. Freeman and Co., San Francisco and London. '

STESLICKA-MYDLARSKA, 1947. Stanowisko W.

systematyczneczlowieka z Ngandong. Annales UMCS, Lublin. 2:37-109.

- . 1953. Morfologia m6zgowia w filo1955. Indywidualne okreslanie taxgenezie czlowiekowatych. onomiczne. Przeglqd Antropologiczny Przeglqd antro(Wroclaw) 21:968-90. [IM*] pologiczny 19:261-78. STRANDSKOV, H. 1951. The genetics of WicH, J. 1959. Struktura antropologiczna H. human -populations. Cold Springs Harpowiatu Aleksandr6w Kujawski. Prze25:193-204. bor Symposia on Quantitative Biology glqd antropologiczny 15 (Origin and Evolution of Man): -. WIERCIN'SKI, A. 1955. Zagadnienie pobytu Gotow na ziemiach polskich w swietle SZCZOTKA, and Z. SZCZOTKA. H., 1959. Okredanych antropologii. Przeglqd antroslenia typologii morfologicznej na tle pologiczny21:892-914. metodykorelacji stochastycznej. Przeglqd antropologiczny 1956. Zagadnienie pojawienia siq 25:387-98. i formHomo sapiens we wczesnym srodTAO, YUN KUEI. 1935. Chinesen-Europlierkowymplejstocenie. Przeglqd antropoloinnen-Kreuzung. Zeitschrift fiur Morgiczny22:267-85. phologie und Anthropologie33:349-408. 1958. Dziedziczenie typu antropolo---. VALLOIS, V. 1943. Anthropologie de la H. gicznego. Materialy i prace antropolopopulation francaise. Paris: giczna, Wroclaw. 43:1-71. WALISZKO. 1959. Wplyw par cech skorelo- ---. 1959. Zagadnienie stanowiska systewanych na istotnosc'nadwyzek metodw matycznego znaleziska Ganovce. Przeglqd zie stochastycznejkorelacji wielorakiej. antropologiczny 25:111-22. Przeglad Antropologiczny25:369-86. 1961 (in press). 0 zastosowaniach WANKE,A. 1952. Czesto?c zespol6w cech badafi antropologicznych w dziedzinie Prace Wroclawskiego antropologicznych. etnogenezy.Warszawa: Swiatowit. Towarzystwa Naukowego, ser. B, 29:1-57. [AW*] 1953. Metoda badan czestogci wyste- Woo, T. L., and G. MORANT. 1932. A prepowania zespol6w cach czyli metoda liminary classification of Asiatic races stochastycznej korelacji wielorakiej. based on cranial measurements.BiomePrzeglqd antropologiczny19:106-47. trika 24:108-34.

46

CURRENT

ANTHROPOLOGY