Journal of the History of Biology

, Volume 41, Issue 1, pp 119–158 | Cite as

Quantifying Characters: Polygenist Anthropologists and the Hardening of Heredity

Article

Abstract

Scholars studying the history of heredity suggest that during the 19th-century biologists and anthropologists viewed characteristics as a collection of blended qualities passed on from the parents. Many argued that those characteristics could be very much affected by environmental circumstances, which scholars call the inheritance of acquired characteristics or “soft” heredity. According to these accounts, Gregor Mendel reconceived heredity – seeing distinct hereditary units that remain unchanged by the environment. This resulted in particular traits that breed true in succeeding generations, or “hard” heredity. The author argues that polygenist anthropology (an argument that humanity consisted of many species) and anthropometry in general should be seen as a hardening of heredity. Using a debate between Philadelphia anthropologist and physician, Samuel G. Morton, and Charleston naturalist and reverend, John Bachman, as a springboard, the author contends that polygenist anthropologists hardened heredity by conceiving of durable traits that might reappear even after a race has been eliminated. Polygenists saw anthropometry (the measurement of humans) as one method of quantifying hereditary qualities. These statistical ranges were ostensibly characteristics that bred true and that defined racial groups. Further, Morton’s interest in hybridity and racial mixing demonstrates that the polygenists focused as much on the transmission and recognition of “amalgamations” of characters as they did on racial categories themselves. The author suggests that seeing race science as the study of heritable, statistical characteristics rather than broad categories helps explain why “race” is such a persistent cultural phenomenon.

Keywords

anthropology biology character eugenics heredity monogenism polygenism trait 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Allen, R. L. 1847. Domestic Animals, History and Description of the Horse, Mule, Cattle, Sheep, Swine, Poultry, and Farm Dogs. New York: Orange and Judd and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  2. Appel, Toby A. 1987. The Cuvier-Geoffroy Debate: French Biology in the Decades Before Darwin. New York: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  3. Aristotle. 1984. The Complete Works of Aristotle (Jonathan Barnes, ed.). Princeton: Princeton University Press, Vol. IGoogle Scholar
  4. Bachman, John. 1850a. Second Letter to Samuel G. Morton, M. D., on the Question of Hybridity in Animals, Considered in Reference to the Unity of the Human Species. Charleston Medical Journal, 5, 622–660Google Scholar
  5. Bachman, John. 1850b. An Investigation of the Cases of Hybridity in Animals on Record, Considered in Reference to the Unity of the Human Species. Charleston Medical Journal, 5, 169–197Google Scholar
  6. Bachman, John. 1850c. The Doctrine of the Unity of the Human Race Examined on the Principles of Science. Charleston: C. CanningGoogle Scholar
  7. Bachman, John. 1854. Nott and Gliddon’s Types of Mankind. Charleston Medical Journal and Review, 9(5), 627–659Google Scholar
  8. Barkan, Ealazar. 1992. The Retreat of Scientific Racism: Changing Concepts of Race in Britain and the United States Between the World Wars. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  9. Barton, Benjamin Smith. 1805–1806. “Account of Henry Moss, A White Negro: Together with Reflections on the Affection called, by Physiologists, Leucaethipia humana; Facts and Conjectures Relative to the White Colour of Animals, and Observations on the Colour of the Human Species,” The Philadelphia Medical and Physical Journal, 2, 1: 3–18Google Scholar
  10. Bean, Robert Bennett. 1909. “A Scheme to Represent Type Heredity in Man.” Science, Vol. 29 (New Series), 754 (June): 942–944Google Scholar
  11. Bean, Robert Bennett. 1911. Heredity of Hair Form Among the Filipinos. The American Naturalist, 45(537), 524–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Boorstin, Daniel J. 1993 [1948]. The Lost World of Thomas Jefferson. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  13. Bowler Peter. 1984. The Mendelian Revolution: The Emergence of Hereditarian Concepts in Modern Science and Society. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  14. Bowler, Peter J. 2003. Evolution: The History of an Idea 3rd ed. Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  15. Broca, Paul. 1864. On the Phenomena of Hybridity in the Genus Homo. (C. Carter Black, trans.). London: Longman, Green, Longman, and RobertsGoogle Scholar
  16. Canguilhem, Georges. 1988. Ideology and Rationality in the History of the Life Sciences (Arthur Goldhammer, trans.). Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
  17. Carr, Helen. 1996. Inventing the American Primitive: Politics, Gender and the Representation of Native American Literary Traditions, 1789–1936. Cork: Cork University PressGoogle Scholar
  18. Coleman, William. 1964. Georges Cuvier, Zoologist: A Study in the History of Evolution Theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  19. Cope, Edward Drinker. 1887. The Origin of the Fittest: Essays on Evolution. New York: D. Appleton and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  20. Cravens, Hamilton. 1978. The Triumph of Evolution: American Scientists and the Heredity-Environment Controversy. Philadelphia: University of Philadelphia PressGoogle Scholar
  21. Dain, Bruce. 2002. A Hideous Monster of the Mind: American Race Theory in the Early Republic. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  22. Darwin, Charles. 1936. The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex [1871] in The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man. New York: The Modern LibraryGoogle Scholar
  23. Davenport, Gertrude C. 1907. Hereditary Crime. The American Journal of Sociology, 13(3). 402–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Davenport, Charles Benedict. 1913. Heredity in Relation to Eugenics. New York: Henry Holt and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  25. Davenport, Charles B., Davenport, Gertrude C. 1907. Heredity of Eye-Color in Man. Science, 26(670): 589–592. (New Series)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Davenport, Charles B., Davenport, Gertrude C. 1908. Heredity and Hair-Form in Man. The American Naturalist, 42(497): 341–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Davenport, Charles B., Davenport, Gertrude C. 1909. Heredity and Hair Color in Man. The American Naturalist, 43(508): 193–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Davenport, Charles B. and Davenport, Gertrude C.1910a. “Heredity of Skin Pigment in Man.” The American Naturalist, 44(527): 641–672Google Scholar
  29. Davenport, Charles B., Davenport, Gertrude C. 1910b. Heredity of Skin Pigment in Man II. The American Naturalist, 44(528), 705–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Desmond, Adrian. 1989. The Politics of Evolution: Morphology, Medicine, and Reform in Radical London. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  31. Farley, John. 1982. Gametes and Spores: Ideas About Sexual Reproduction, 1750–1914. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  32. Forbes, Jack D. 1993. Africans and Native Americans: The Language of Race and the Evolution of Red-Black Peoples. 2nd ed. Urbana: University of Illinois PressGoogle Scholar
  33. Fox, Christopher Fox, Porter, Roy, Wolker, Robert. (eds.). 1995. Inventing Human Science: Eighteenth-Century Domains. Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  34. Galton, Francis. 1865. Hereditary Talent and Character. Macmillan’s Magazine, 12(157–166 318–327Google Scholar
  35. Galton, Francis. 1889. Natural Inheritance. London: Macmillan and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  36. Galton, Francis.1892 and 1869. Hereditary Genius; An Inquiry into its Laws and Consequences. London: Macmillan and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  37. Gasking, Elizabeth. 1966. Investigations into Generation. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  38. Genovese, Eugene D. 1988 [1969]. The World the Slaveholders Made: Two Essays in Interpretation. Middletown: Wesleyan University PressGoogle Scholar
  39. Gent A. S. 1697. The Husbandman, Farmer, and Grasier’s Compleat Instructor. London: Printed for Henry NeimeGoogle Scholar
  40. Gillham, Nocholas Wright. 2001. A Life of Sir Francis Galton: From African Explorations to the Birth of Eugenics. New York. Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  41. Gould, Stephen Jay. 1996 The Mismeasure of Man (revised ed.). New York: W. W. Norton and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  42. Haller, John S. Jr. 1971. Outcasts from Evolution: Scientific Attitudes of Racial Inferiority, 1859–1900. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University PressGoogle Scholar
  43. Hawkins, Mike. 1997. Social Darwinism in European and American Thought, 1860–1945. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  44. Hinsley, Curtis M. 1994 [1981]. The Smithsonian Institution and the American Indian: Making a Moral Anthropology in Victorian America. Washington, D.C.: Smithsonian Institution PressGoogle Scholar
  45. Hrdlička, Aleš. 1918. Physical Anthropology: Its Scope and Aims; its History and Present Status in America. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 1, 3–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Hume, Brad D. Forthcoming. “We the People”: Heredity, Human Science, and Identity in America, 1776–1861. Johns Hopkins University PressGoogle Scholar
  47. Hyneman, Charles S. and Donald S. Lutz (eds.). 1983. American Political Writing during the Founding Era, 1760–1805 (two vols.). Indianapolis: Liberty FundGoogle Scholar
  48. Jackson, John P., Nadine, M. Weidman. 2004. Race, Racism, and Science: Social Impact and Interaction. New Brunswick: Rutgers University PressGoogle Scholar
  49. Jacob, François. 1982. The Logic of Life: A History of Heredity (Betty E. Spillman, trans.). New York: Pantheon BooksGoogle Scholar
  50. Jacyna, L. S. 1987. Medical Science and Moral Science: The Cultural Relations of Physiology in Restoration France. History of Science, 25, 111–146Google Scholar
  51. Jefferson, Thomas. 1954 [1787]. Notes on the State of Virginia (William Peden, ed.). New␣York: W. W. Norton and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  52. Jefferson, Thomas.1984. Thomas Jefferson: Writings (Merrill D. Peterson, ed.). New York: The Library of AmericaGoogle Scholar
  53. Jordanova, Ludmilla J. 1979. Earth Science and Environmental Medicine: The Synthesis of the Late Enlightenment. In: L. J. Jordanova, Roy S. Porter (eds.). Images of the Earth: Essays in the History of the Environmental Science. Chalfont St. Giles: The British Society for the History of Science: pp. 119–146Google Scholar
  54. Kant, Immanuel. 2000. Of the Different Human Races [1777]. In: Robert Bernasconi, Tommy L. Lott (eds.). The Idea of Race. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.: pp. 8–22Google Scholar
  55. Kevles, Daniel J. 1995. In the Name of Eugenics: Genetics and the Uses of Human Heredity (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  56. Kline, Wendy. 2001. Building a Better Race: Gender, Sexuality, and Eugenics from the Turn of the Century to the Baby Boom. Berkeley: University of California PressGoogle Scholar
  57. Kuklick, Henrika, 1991. The Savage Within: The Social History of British Anthropology, 1885–1945. New York: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  58. Laski, H. J. 1912. A Mendelian View of Racial Heredity. Biometrika, 8(3/4), 424–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Lenoir, Timothy. 1980. Kant, Blumenbach, and Vital Materialism in German Biology. Isis, 71, 77–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Lenoir, Timothy. 1981. The Göttingen School and the Development of Transcendental Naturphilosophie in the Romantic Era. In: William Coleman, Camille Limoges (eds.) Studies in the History of Biology Vol. 5. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press: pp. 111–206Google Scholar
  61. Magnello, M. Eileen. 1998. Karl Pearson’s Mathematization of Inheritance: From Ancestral Heredity to Mendelian Genetics (1895–1909). Annals of Science, 55, 35–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. McLoughlin, William G. 1982. Cherokee Renascence in the New Republic. Princeton: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  63. Michael, John S. 1988. A New Look at Morton’s Craniological Research. Current Anthropology, 29(1), 349–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Morgan, Lewis Henry. 1959. Lewis Henry Morgan: The Indian Journals, 1859–1862 (Leslie A.White, ed.). Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan PressGoogle Scholar
  65. Morton, Samuel G. 1844. Observations on Egyptian Ethnography, Derived from Anatomy, History, and the Monuments. Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 9, 93–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Morton, Samuel G. 1847. “Hybridity in Animals, considered in reference to the question of the Unity of the Human Species.” The American Journal of Science and Arts 3: 39–50 and 203–212Google Scholar
  67. Morton, Samuel G. 1850a. Additional Observations on Hybridity in Animals, and on Some Collateral Subjects; Being a Reply to the Objections of the Rev. John Bachman, D. D. Charleston Medical Journal, 5, 756–805Google Scholar
  68. Morton, Samuel G. 1850b. Letter to the Rev. John Bachman, D. D., on the Question of Hybridity in Animals, Considered in Reference to the Unity of the Human Species. Charleston, SC: Walker and JamesGoogle Scholar
  69. Morton, Samuel G. 1851. Notes on Hybridity in Animals, and on some collateral subjects. Charleston Medical Journal and Review, 6, 373–383Google Scholar
  70. Mullin, Michael. 1992. Africa in America: Slave Acculturation and Resistance in the American South and the British Caribbean, 1736–1831. Urbana: University of Illinois PressGoogle Scholar
  71. Nott, Josiah Clark. 1844. Two Lectures on the Natural History of the Caucasian and Negro Races. Mobile: Dade and ThompsonGoogle Scholar
  72. Nott, Josiah Clark, Gliddon, George R. 1871. Types of Mankind: Or, Ethnological Researches, Based Upon the Ancient Monuments, Paintings, Sculptures, and Crania of Races, and Upon Their Natural Geographical, Philological, and Biblical History (10th edition). Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott and CoGoogle Scholar
  73. Olby, Robert C. 1985. Origins of Mendelism (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar
  74. Olson, Richard. 1993. The Emergence of the Social Sciences, 1642–1792. New York: Twayne PublishersGoogle Scholar
  75. Pearson, Karl. 1905. National Life from the Standpoint of Science. London: Adam and Charles BlackGoogle Scholar
  76. 1909. Note on the Skin-Colour of the Crosses Between Negro and White. Biometrika, 6(4), 348–353Google Scholar
  77. Pliny, the Elder. 1949. Natural History (H. Rackham, trans.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  78. Porter, Theodore M. 2004. Karl Pearson: The Scientific Life in a Statistical Age. Princeton: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
  79. Rainger, Ronald. 1978. Race, Politics, and Science: The Anthropological Society of London in the 1860s. Victorian Studies, 22, 51–70Google Scholar
  80. Regal, Brian. 2002. Henry Fairfield Osborn: Race and the Search for the Origins of Man. Burlington, VT: Ashgate PressGoogle Scholar
  81. Richards, Robert J. 2002. The Romantic Conception of Life: Science and Philosophy in the Age of Goethe. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  82. Sargent II Frederick. 1982. Hippocratic Heritage: A History of Ideas About Weather and Human Health. New York: Pergamon PressGoogle Scholar
  83. Schiebringer, Londa. 1993. Nature's Body: Gender in the Making of Modern Science. Boston: Beacon PressGoogle Scholar
  84. Sheehan, Bernard W. 1973. Seeds of Extinction: Jeffersonian Philanthropy and the American Indian. New York: W. W. Norton and CompanyGoogle Scholar
  85. Smith, John Augustine. 1809. A Lecture introductory to the second Course of Anatomical Instruction in the College of Physicians and Surgeons for the State of New-York; delivered in that Institution, on Friday, the 11th of November, 1808. New-York Medical and Philosophical Journal and Review, 1, 32–48Google Scholar
  86. Smith, Samuel Stanhope. 1965 [1810]. An Essay on the Causes of the Variety of Complexion and Figure in the Human Species (2nd ed., Winthrop D. Jordan, ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University PressGoogle Scholar
  87. Smith, Roger. 1997. The Human Sciences. New York: W. W. Norton and CoGoogle Scholar
  88. Stanton, William. 1960. The Leopard’s Spots: Scientific Attitudes Toward Race in America, 1815–1859. Chicago: University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
  89. Stephens, Lester D. 2000. Science, Race, and Religion in the American South: John Bachman and the Charleston Circle of Naturalists, 1815–1895. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina PressGoogle Scholar
  90. Stocking, George W. 1973. “From Chronology to Ethnology: James Cowles Prichard and British Anthropology, 1800–1850,” introduction to James Cowles Prichard’s Researches into the Physical History of Man (facsimile reprint of the first ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press, [1813], pp. ix–cxGoogle Scholar
  91. Stocking, George W. 1987. Victorian Anthropology. New York: Free PressGoogle Scholar
  92. Young, Robert J. C. 1995. Colonial Desire: Hybridity in Theory, Culture and Race. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of HistoryUniversity of DaytonDaytonUSA

Personalised recommendations